PDA

View Full Version : Happy Digital's Autograss...



Gregg "T.Rex"
08-25-2009, 08:18 AM
Just saw this and it looks awesome!
http://www.happy-digital.com/autograss/images/grass_final_06.jpg
http://www.happy-digital.com/autograss/ (http://www.happy-digital.com/autograss/)
I wonder if Graham has plans to make a LightWave version as well...

It does feel kinda sad, seeing another great LW developer, start writing tools for alien 3D apps. Of course, i truly wish him all the best in this endeavor and new market for him and i'm sure he'll conquer the Max community as well, but... i hope this doesn't mean he'll back down from writing great tools for LW or later for Core, as well...

Andyjaggy
08-25-2009, 09:18 AM
Good for him, I hope he does well. It looks awesome.

archijam
08-25-2009, 09:20 AM
More specifically, it's a plugin for Vray, for MAX.

Perhaps he can write one for Kray ;) ?

Larry_g1s
08-25-2009, 09:47 AM
Perhaps he can write one for Kray ;) ?I'm with you James on that one.

jameswillmott
08-25-2009, 09:47 AM
More specifically, it's a plugin for Vray, for MAX.
?

A plugin for a plugin?

Larry_g1s
08-25-2009, 10:14 AM
A plugin for a plugin?:stumped: That's deep.

biliousfrog
08-25-2009, 10:18 AM
That would explain the poor tech support for HD Instance then

JML
08-25-2009, 10:19 AM
how about just for Lightwave first.
but I guess the same can be done with HDinstance if he release the source of grass instances. Maybe as a pay-package for all HDinstance users ?

adamredwoods
08-25-2009, 10:55 AM
With the advent and mystery of LW Core, it's no wonder that developers are in flux re: Lightwave. When Core is finally released, there may be new developers that pickup where the old ones left off.

We won't see much development on anything until it is released.

cresshead
08-25-2009, 10:56 AM
i can see a few plugin developers move to other apps as the dev on lightwave has dried up now with the final version out [9.6] and no further versions due.

of course we'd also hope that the same lightwave plugin developers will move over to core but they have to cover the 'dark time' where lightwave dev has ended and core is yet to be production ready.

Andyjaggy
08-25-2009, 11:00 AM
If I was a dev I would do Max plugins. My guess is he is going to make more money selling this plugin for max then he made with HD Instance, and he's going to spend most of his time on Max plugins now. Ya gotta make your money.

Lightwolf
08-25-2009, 11:05 AM
My guess is he is going to make more money selling this plugin for max then he made with HD Instance, and he's going to spend most of his time on Max plugins now.
I'd think so as well... especially as he can charge for render licenses as well (as it's common on that platform).

Cheers,
Mike

Nicolas Jordan
08-25-2009, 11:11 AM
Looks cool but you can easily accomplish the same thing with HD Instance. The only benefit is that this plugin would probably make grass a bit faster to set up and have preset grasses ready to go.

All I seem to hear about these days is Vray this and Vray that. :grumpy:

JML
08-25-2009, 11:14 AM
Looks cool but you can easily accomplish the same thing with HD Instance. The only benefit is that this plugin would probably make grass a bit faster to set up and have preset grasses ready to go.

Yep, and with HD instance we can place whatever we want, trees,cars,etc.. not just grass.

Gregg "T.Rex"
08-25-2009, 11:18 AM
i can see a few plugin developers move to other apps as the dev on lightwave has dried up now with the final version out [9.6] and no further versions due.

of course we'd also hope that the same lightwave plugin developers will move over to core but they have to cover the 'dark time' where lightwave dev has ended and core is yet to be production ready.
LW 9.6 may be the last LightWave version as we know it but despite that, NewTek is still working and fixing things for it. LightWave 9.6 (or 10.0) have come a long way and still have another 4-6 years of useful production life for its end users. I don't see why developers should stop writing nice tools for it, while keeping an eye on Core or other 3D platforms...

LightWave should stay alive and active, even when Core will be well established, frankly because i am not sold that Core will be the new LightWave as NewTek insists. It will be a high-end, cool and probably better 3D app, but NOT LightWave as we used to know and love...

So, i encourage all LW developers, like Graham and Steve, to continue support LightWave 9.6 and it's well established user base for the years ahead...

tyrot
08-25-2009, 11:21 AM
dear andy

that is really sad. Another plugin writer "almost" left the Lightwave. What s gonna happen to others? Wtools? Kray? ...Who is next fellas?

Best

Andyjaggy
08-25-2009, 11:36 AM
Who knows, it's all a guessing game. I'm just saying if I was a plugin developer I would be seriously thinking about leaving LW at the moment, at least for the time being. I mean it's simple math, look at the user base of the 3D apps, Max probably has 6X more users then LW, so you have the potential of making 6X the amount of money on a plugin. It probably wouldn't work out exactly like that but I can't imagine you would make less selling Max plugins over LW plugins.

biliousfrog
08-25-2009, 11:38 AM
There's also a lot more competition with Max plugins. The Lightwave userbase doesn't really allow a lot of competition.

Andyjaggy
08-25-2009, 11:45 AM
There's also a lot more competition with Max plugins. The Lightwave userbase doesn't really allow a lot of competition.

That's why it wouldn't work out exactly 6X the amount of sales, but I bet you anything you would sell more.

BUT..... It's kind of like when people say that there aren't as many LW users so your more likely to be able to get a LW job because there isn't as much competition. It's simply not true, because there might be (let's keep the same analogy) 6X fewer LW users so there is less competition, but there are also 6X fewer LW jobs, so your odds are the same, or only slightly better. Simple logic.

But, I guess following that logic you would still sell the same amount of plugins. :) Still though, I stick with my original opinion, you would make more money selling Max plugins over LW plugins. But maybe an actual developer familiar with the business could chime in.

calilifestyle
08-25-2009, 11:46 AM
There's also a lot more competition with Max plugins. The Lightwave userbase doesn't really allow a lot of competition.

From what i can tell it's an SDk thing. When i used Max my last version was 5. there was already lots of plug-ins. I remember Blur Studios used to give lot of useful pulg-ins to the community, for example. Biggest problem is that if max cant do it out of the box there's a plug-in that will.

Nicolas Jordan
08-25-2009, 11:52 AM
Who knows, it's all a guessing game. I'm just saying if I was a plugin developer I would be seriously thinking about leaving LW at the moment, at least for the time being.

By the time the developer gets all the technology moved and ported to another app the grass will look greener over here again so they will have to port it back to Lightwave Core. :)

calilifestyle
08-25-2009, 11:56 AM
By the time the developer gets all the technology moved and ported to another app the grass will look greener over here again so they will have to port it back to Lightwave Core. :)

it's not hard to develop for a product with a stable sdk. who know how long before Core gets their sdk out.

mav3rick
08-25-2009, 12:18 PM
well it is about time NEWTEK release CORE SDK or we will see more and more 3rd party guys leaving lw

Lightwolf
08-25-2009, 12:21 PM
well it is about time NEWTEK release CORE SDK or we will see more and more 3rd party guys leaving lw
Well, we've still got as few updates planned. No new products though.

Cheers,
Mike

pixelinfected
08-25-2009, 12:34 PM
actually a good reason to develop for max is simple: more money every year.

max user know that must buy external plugins
max user know that every year must buy a new version of max and buy update of all plugins that stop to work with new version of max

a developer for max know that if he have 500 user, every year can reiceve request for since 400 payed update...
a developer for lw don't know when his user decide to buy an update if plugins work with new update of lightwave.

calilifestyle
08-25-2009, 12:38 PM
actually a good reason to develop for max is simple: more money every year.

max user know that must buy external plugins
max user know that every year must buy a new version of max and buy update of all plugins that stop to work with new version of max

a developer for max know that if he have 500 user, every year can reiceve request for since 400 payed update...
a developer for lw don't know when his user decide to buy an update if plugins work with new update of lightwave.

That's weird, is this new to the max 2008 and up. I remember my version 4 plug-ins worked with max 5. I might have had 1 or 2 that didn't but they had a version 5 then, for free.

archijam
08-25-2009, 01:01 PM
that is really sad. Another plugin writer "almost" left the Lightwave. What s gonna happen to others? Wtools? Kray? ...Who is next fellas?

The sky seems to be hovering at the same altitude as usual, here ;) ..

wacom
08-25-2009, 01:08 PM
Sorry to be so cynical but...

I'm always confused as to why MAX people love the plug fest so much. Oh well, if you have a project that requires grass, and do a lot of that thing, then I guess this is the ticket.

I always found his plugins very helpful, and overly expensive. So it will fit perfectly in the MAX user base arsenal!

This is why CORE should be a better answer. Users will make their own version, and it can be improved upon by the community. Otherwise you're always a "slave" to the developer or plugin developer. That's just my opinion though...

Think about why you don't see a lot of plugins for Houdini- it's not just because of the small user base.

I'm not saying all plugins are this way. Some things should be done by the developer and if they are not, then 3rd parties need to or have an opportunity to fill the void because there is no way, or no trusted way, to do them with the current tool set. HD instance was/is this way, as are Lightwolf's options. I just find the excitement about this grass shader, esp. at the price, ridiculous.

pixelinfected
08-25-2009, 01:36 PM
That's weird, is this new to the max 2008 and up. I remember my version 4 plug-ins worked with max 5. I might have had 1 or 2 that didn't but they had a version 5 then, for free.
i worked in a studio where they use max, and i see that, not for all plugs, but most of plug are like maya style, new maya, new plugs update.
for 2009 and 2010 max i can confirm for most of vfx plugs.

MrWyatt
08-25-2009, 01:40 PM
Think about why you don't see a lot of plugins for Houdini- it's not just because of the small user base.


actually there is only one I believe and that is for making a wavy ocean, but it is free I believe. side effects philosophy was always "own the tool" meaning, when you can develop your own tools in houdini, you do not depend on someone else to update or fix it, just do it yourself.

SplineGod
08-25-2009, 01:47 PM
fiberfx is supposed to do instancing but was never able to get it to work...

geo_n
08-25-2009, 08:20 PM
dear andy

that is really sad. Another plugin writer "almost" left the Lightwave. What s gonna happen to others? Wtools? Kray? ...Who is next fellas?

Best

Kray will not be lightwave only. It will support other platform in the future. :D

TeZzy
08-25-2009, 09:23 PM
fiberfx is supposed to do instancing but was never able to get it to work...

fiberfx is supposed to work....but unfortunately.....................

khan973
08-25-2009, 09:37 PM
Kray does instancing pretty well.
Autograss, completely fits many Max users who look for presets, for a "click and do exerything feature".
We have the tools to mke such stuff, and being generalists in LW makes us more creative with how we can achieve something.
Look what some (really good) users have made and shared on Kray:
http://www.kraytracing.com/forum/download/file.php?id=2410&mode=view
It's far more convincing to me...

geo_n
08-25-2009, 10:12 PM
Kray does instancing pretty well.
Autograss, completely fits many Max users who look for presets, for a "click and do exerything feature".
We have the tools to mke such stuff, and being generalists in LW makes us more creative with how we can achieve something.
Look what some (really good) users have made and shared on Kray:
http://www.kraytracing.com/forum/download/file.php?id=2410&mode=view
It's far more convincing to me...

Thinking that only lw users are more generalist than max or maya users is not good. And that render is made by johny so it is really good. A very great archiviz renderer in lw but even jure admits there's thousands of johnys using max. I don't underestimate max users as being less creative http://www.vismasters.com/gallery.cfm?Professional=1 :D

THIS is good grass and its built in maya
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=132&t=754315&page=1&pp=15

wacom
08-25-2009, 11:12 PM
fiberfx is supposed to do instancing but was never able to get it to work...

Well like I said, HD instance is a much needed addition to LW for most people, and there is no direct support for it AND it's for such a low level thing. It's kind of hard to cook up instancing on your own AFAIK unless you know some good ol programing AND the applications SDK like the back of your hand. Grass though...

I'm sure this grass is going to rock someone's socks though.

HD instance has a few clever things too that go beyond normal instancing and normal mortal tweaks. It's a good plug- and not a "MAX" plug IMHO!

I guess I'm just surprised because you can buy whole "vegitation creation" plugins and apps for as much, less, or a little more. Maybe it's a Vray thing...?

Limbus
08-26-2009, 01:53 AM
I don't think this gras, or the other examples in the gallery, look very realistic. I have seen much better grass done with Kray instances.

Cheers, Florian

trick
08-26-2009, 02:31 AM
I don't think this gras, or the other examples in the gallery, look very realistic. I have seen much better grass done with Kray instances.

Cheers, Florian

Even if the gras was blue, it's about the tech behind it. With this technology you can make the most believable and endless grassplanes which was not possible with ANY plugin in Max. Even HDInstance has trouble doing this with the density feature. I am a Max user since 3dStudio DOS R1 and Lightwave since v4 and consequently I know there is a very good reason VRay is where it is now. I'm using all the instancing plugins (GroundWiz, VRayScatter, Forest Pro and AutoGrass) for Max and they all have very specific features that I need AT LEAST on a weekly basis. Autograss is the only one I need on a DAILY basis. I never regretted investing in any of them !! I have done great things with Lightwave but I'm just doing greater things with Max/VRay and faster and easier. I have seen a lot of plugin developers come and go faster then I would like and Graham (Happy Digital) is one of the "stayers", because he knows what he's selling. Currently I don't believe it wise spending huge amounts of time developing Lightwave 6 or Core plugins...especially not a grass plugin which can be done in a lesser degree with HDInstance...for less $$$ BTW !!

Andyjaggy
08-26-2009, 08:53 AM
and being generalists in LW makes us more creative with how we can achieve something.

Oh you mean hack workarounds, that take you all day to make work, and then when the client wants something changed you have to completely redo the entire thing?

I love LW, but I hate these generalization such as "Oh Max users aren't creative, they can't come up with solutions to problems, they have to have a plugin for everything" It's a bunch of bull shiz and simply not true.

I would take this one click grass anyday, if I wad doing archviz renders everyday, I wouldn't want to spend all day trying to get decent looking grass, I would set the grass up in 5 minutes using this plugin and then focus my energy on composition, modeling, and lighting. I guess if grass really turned you on you might want to spend all day fussing with it, but not me.

Limbus
08-26-2009, 09:06 AM
Even if the gras was blue, it's about the tech behind it. With this technology you can make the most believable and endless grassplanes which was not possible with ANY plugin in Max.

I was just stating that the images in the gallery don't show that you can use this tool to "make the most believable and endless grassplanes".

trick
08-26-2009, 09:08 AM
...I would set the grass up in 5 minutes using this plugin and then focus my energy on composition, modeling, and lighting...

That's exactly how I think at the end of every day. Like if you had to cut down a whole tree spending all day to make a pencil, so you finally can make your art piece :( Making grass with Autograss is - really - more like 5 seconds.

trick
08-26-2009, 09:14 AM
I was just stating that the images in the gallery don't show that you can use this tool to "make the most believable and endless grassplanes".

The thing with most plugins is their bad galleries. You just have to look at the tech behind it. I'm also using finalRender for Max which for certain situations is certainly better then VRay...but if you look at their galleries you would never think of spending a single dime on that tool !

Autograss is nothing more then a very intelligent and memory friendly scatter plugin...and it can only scatter grassblades. If you don't use Linear Workflow in VRay you even can throw away the AutoGrass presets and have to make your own. The art is just up to you !

G-Man
08-26-2009, 09:58 AM
You can pretty much get the same results with Sasquatch. Granted, they aren't actual blades of grass, but you can definitely achieve the grass he is showing in his examples.

EDIT: Ok, after looking at his images further, that is a lot more realistic than what Sasquatch could achieve. However you can get pretty close with Sas for general stuff.

dmack
08-26-2009, 10:39 AM
With Core's suggested open and full access architecture, plugin developers should have a good time with core....All this dependant on the SDK being as they are suggesting....

I'm really hoping Core will pull back the 3rd party developers...it's not good when they start to leave an app.

biliousfrog
08-26-2009, 11:01 AM
I haven't managed to get grass to work with HDinstance, certainly nothing as complex as that title image anyway. In fact I've struggled to get anything remotely complex done with HDinstance, it seems as buggy as hell and I've actually found that imported geometry is often less likely to crash upon rendering.

JML
08-26-2009, 11:15 AM
I haven't managed to get grass to work with HDinstance, certainly nothing as complex as that title image anyway. In fact I've struggled to get anything remotely complex done with HDinstance, it seems as buggy as hell and I've actually found that imported geometry is often less likely to crash upon rendering.

Wow.. you say "buggy as hell" ?
we use it everyday with very complex scenes, and so are many others studios.
weird you are having those issues.. are you on mac ?

I made grass a long time ago with hdinstance which looked fine, the only problem was the flickering.
that was with LW8, now with the LW9 rendering engine, I wonder how the flicker would be.

Larry_g1s
08-26-2009, 11:27 AM
The sky seems to be hovering at the same altitude as usual, here ;) ..I'm with you too James. What's with all this "sky is falling" mentality. So the guys writing a plug-in for a competing 3D app., it doesn't mean he'd done with or ever going to write for LW (current or present). It just might mean he's expanding, not replacing, his user base.

Larry_g1s
08-26-2009, 11:29 AM
Wow.. you say "buggy as hell" ?
we use it everyday with very complex scenes, and so are many others studios.Yeah, sorry biliousfrog, I'm not having the same problems with HDI. It's always been real stable for me. (XP64bit)

biliousfrog
08-27-2009, 04:30 AM
Yeah, sorry biliousfrog, I'm not having the same problems with HDI. It's always been real stable for me. (XP64bit)

I'm on XP64 too. Right from the start I realised that using weightmaps to control anything, density for example, often resulted in weird 'blocks' of geometry or black instances. Someone else reported the same problems at the time when using weightmaps. Unfortunately the only response I got from Graham was asking what version of HDI I was using, I didn't hear anything else after that.

I've also found it to be very slow to render. Perhaps I'm expecting too much but it just seems to take a lot longer to render instances than imported geometry...obviously it has advantages when dealing with geometry within the scene though.

Larry_g1s
08-27-2009, 08:41 AM
I've actually got the black instancing error you mentioned sometimes too. Sorry about that, forgot about that.

praa
08-28-2009, 12:09 PM
I've also found it to be very slow to render. Perhaps I'm expecting too much but it just seems to take a lot longer to render instances than imported geometry...

i found that HDI 2 is at least 8 times slower than HDI 1.8

don't know why tho...

JML
08-28-2009, 06:08 PM
if you have volumetric ON in your radiosity settings, HDI 2 will corectly
receive final gather on the intances.. which is much slower of course but
create beautiful result.
that would be my first guess..

fyffe
08-29-2009, 10:45 PM
Yeah, we're looking into the speed weirdness on LW 9.6. It's going slowly though.

Gregg "T.Rex"
08-29-2009, 11:09 PM
It's going slowly though.

No wonder why..... :D:jester:

fyffe
08-30-2009, 01:23 PM
Recently Newtek changed (improved, actually) the way a lot of render flags are passed around by plugins, which mostly affects radiosity and some material nodes. It's taken a while to get everything updated to the new flags, but it's worth it. I've posted the latest 2.0.7 build, which you can get with your order information here:

http://www.happy-digital.com/revisit.php

Quick test with animated elves, rendered in 40 seconds on my Big Mac:

http://www.happy-digital.com/tests/elves_40s.jpg

Hieron
08-30-2009, 02:44 PM
Nice, thanks for looking into this and fixing it. Downloading the update now.

Larry_g1s
08-30-2009, 03:28 PM
[QUOTE=fyffe;920364]Recently Newtek changed (improved, actually) the way a lot of render flags are passed around by plugins, which mostly affects radiosity and some material nodes. It's taken a while to get everything updated to the new flags, but it's worth it. I've posted the latest 2.0.7 build, which you can get with your order information here:

http://www.happy-digital.com/revisit.php

Quick test with animated elves, rendered in 40 seconds on my Big Mac:

fyffe
08-30-2009, 03:56 PM
Very good Graham. Can you also address the concerns on this thread about future Happy Digital dev an LW?

We're interested in supporting core, but the timeline for doing that will depend a lot on the sdk. It may be a major undertaking.

COBRASoft
08-30-2009, 04:14 PM
Hey,

What about some grass presets for HD in LW 9.6? You have the experience now anyway :thumbsup:

Glad to know you're interested in CORE. A lot of people are waiting for the SDK.

Greetings,
Sigurd

erikals
08-30-2009, 04:23 PM
there is an old grass tutorial on the HD site, it is quite good, though the example renders are bad.

i tried it using HDRI and GI, and getting quality grass like the image that was posted here using HDi is piece-of-cake.

Autograss power though looks to be the speed you can save 'modeling' the grass

adk
08-30-2009, 05:18 PM
... thanks for the update Graham :thumbsup: much appreciated and welcome.

All the best in your future endeavours, wherever they may lead :)

Larry_g1s
08-30-2009, 06:22 PM
We're interested in supporting core, but the timeline for doing that will depend a lot on the sdk. It may be a major undertaking.That's great to hear, and totally understandable. I just wanted you to correct some of these naysayers that seem to think you're done supporting LW/LWC just because you're expanding out to additional market users (ie. AutoGrass for Max). :thumbsup:

Hieron
08-31-2009, 02:59 AM
Saw the image on the first post and since I was doing some random testing anyway I decided to discard sleep and spend some hours on trying to duplicate it. edit: well not duplicate the image itself, just trying my take on grass :)

http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/2875/grasscopy.jpg

The plane is about 100x100 meters and I'm sure I could heavily improve on it. This took a bit of time and it's hardly finished (I revised my grass itself just 1 time) but I'm sure it can be improbed alot.

Also, if you just save the grass piece and the HD Instancing settings, setting it up another time is a piece of cake. I may need it in a project soon so hopefully it stands up in production work too...

G-Man
08-31-2009, 06:42 AM
That looks great! Now make about 20 more presets and sell them as a preset library for HD Instance. :thumbsup:

G-Man
08-31-2009, 06:44 AM
How long did that take to render?

JML
08-31-2009, 09:28 AM
That looks great! Now make about 20 more presets and sell them as a preset library for HD Instance. :thumbsup:

or give them for free ;)

Larry_g1s
08-31-2009, 09:52 AM
Very nice Hieron, nice demo of HDI grass.

COBRASoft
08-31-2009, 10:13 AM
Nice Hieron.

I've tried with FFX, but FFX is not able to do this quality and I guess the renderspeed of FFX is slower too.

praa
08-31-2009, 11:10 AM
many thanks to Graham and company

I just tried HD instance 207 on a scene that made me freak out with version 206 (looong render times see previous post...)
now the rendertime has dropped to a tenth ( yes 1/10) of what it was before

KUDOzzzz to my fellow Canadian

Pavlov
08-31-2009, 12:16 PM
Hi Graham, i've a question: i'm a Kray b-tester and as you probably know Kray has a good instancing system but a poor instance placement toolset.
Kray's team would be happy to cooperate with you in order to make HDi's placement tools work with Kray (rendering is very fast also using Kray's own instancing technology so it's not needed you work on this aspect too). Are there specific issues in allowing HDi to feed correct pos-rot-scale input to Kray ?
This thing alone would improve a lot LW in Viz arena for sure.
This could raise HDi's appeal too, since a lot of Kray's users would buy HDi to use it together with Kray.

thanks in advance,
Paolo

Greenlaw
08-31-2009, 12:45 PM
I've posted the latest 2.0.7 build...

This is awesome! Thank you Graham! You've made many LightWave artists very happy today. :)

Greenlaw

geo_n
08-31-2009, 12:51 PM
Are there specific issues in allowing HDi to feed correct pos-rot-scale input to Kray ?


I always thought hdi was working in kray since 1.8beta.
I did a test and it reads hdi r,t,s. But I notice the instance don't cast shadow in kray.

btw, 2.07 is fast. thankyou :D

Hieron
08-31-2009, 01:22 PM
Nice Hieron.

I've tried with FFX, but FFX is not able to do this quality and I guess the renderspeed of FFX is slower too.

Thanks guys, and yeah I tried the same with FFX. Problem with that is that it lures you in... a nice render here a pretty ok UI there, chance to brush the instances...

and then boom, it comes to a grinding halt and you keep dodging bugs etc chasing that nice render. Never again. I spent way too much time on it.


How long did that take to render?

Long actually. It is a crop from a 1920x1080 render at 12 AA and GI. Total of 42 minutes for the entire thing. It is probably improvable though, it would be great to find a way to not have instances veeeery far away (animatable). As soon as I find some time I'll see where it leads.

Hieron
08-31-2009, 02:44 PM
Hmm I'm placing the instances with a weightmap on the surfacing mode per meter.

But the instances are switching every render... I supposed that seed is static and stable??

Unusable for animation this way.. Graham?

Larry_g1s
08-31-2009, 03:16 PM
I'm with Pavlov on this one too Graham. I really really like Kray, but HDI is so much similiar in using to set up. :thumbsup:


But I notice the instance don't cast shadow in kray.

btw, 2.07 is fast. thankyou :DI've found that to be true too. :(

Pavlov
08-31-2009, 03:53 PM
Rendering into kray, Kray's own instances are faster than HDi's volumetric ones.
Best thing would be an option (i.e. a simple "Kray" button into HDi's gui) to force HDi to feed instance's pos,rot,scale to Kray instancing.

Paolo

Larry_g1s
08-31-2009, 03:59 PM
Rendering into kray, Kray's own instances are faster than HDi's volumetric ones.
Best thing would be an option (i.e. a simple "Kray" button into HDi's gui) to force HDi to feed instance's pos,rot,scale to Kray instancing.

PaoloAgreed. Come on Graham, how about it? You can only benefit from this right? :)

Hieron
08-31-2009, 04:00 PM
http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/7633/grasscopy3.jpg

(edit: swapped image for one with a bg)

7.5 minutes render @ 1280x720

Totally not animatable though, the placement of the instances is not static over time.

erikals
08-31-2009, 04:22 PM
7.5 minutes render @ 1280x720

Totally not animatable though, the placement of the instances is not static over time.

hmm, that's strange,...
...but if you avoid placing them using a weightmap it works fine?

Hieron
08-31-2009, 04:40 PM
hmm, that's strange,...
...but if you avoid placing them using a weightmap it works fine?

The weightmap seems to be the issue yes. I tried not using: a subd groundplane, jitter of placement and a weight map. So far, it seems that switching off the weight map makes it static again.

Needles to say, I need the weightmap :)


I tried some very simple scene with some cubes and weightmaps, and there it was all fine even with weightmaps.. (alot less instances though...)

praa
08-31-2009, 05:12 PM
i don't think we'll be needing kray in core...

so i would rather have Graham focus on LW-Core right now
and not disseminate his energy on other short term 3rd party stuff

erikals
08-31-2009, 05:16 PM
it would be nice to get the weightmap issue solved though...

Larry_g1s
08-31-2009, 05:18 PM
http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/7633/grasscopy3.jpg

(edit: swapped image for one with a bg)

7.5 minutes render @ 1280x720

Totally not animatable though, the placement of the instances is not static over time.Looking really good though Hieron. Wow!

Hieron
08-31-2009, 05:20 PM
it would be nice to get the weightmap issue solved though...

:thumbsup:

Trying anything I can imagine to tackle it.. but no clue. It goes wrong where the weight map goes between 100 and -100. I tried normalizing etc, but it doesn't help.
Silly thing is that my cube testscene renders nice and static, I'll keep on disecting the scene I guess to look for clues..


Edit: got it! The problem has to do with having 3 instancing layers on that groundplane in the scene. A logical thing to do ofcourse, but when working with waaaay less numbers and with bounding boxes active, I noticed that changing things in the say 2nd layer, made the 1st layer placement move!? :|
So cloned the groundobject, made then dissolved and gave each object it's own instancing layer.

Nice and static now so a good workaround, but I suppose this is not intended to work like that right? So a fix might be nice and shouldn't be too hard to find now I guess.

Larry_g1s
08-31-2009, 05:57 PM
Mind sharing a little how you did that Hieron, or is it a trade secret?

erikals
08-31-2009, 06:21 PM
Hieron, heh, interesting workaround http://forums.cgsociety.org/images/smilies/smile.gif

Pavlov
08-31-2009, 06:28 PM
Praa, please let's avoid abstract (if not wrong) speculations ;)
General purpose engines - even an excellent one like LW's - cant cover every aspect in depth as a dedicated engine does in its own usage area: Kray wil be hardly useless, at least for pro's working in Viz area.
Generally NT is focusing on *structure* more than specific features: 3D market is more and more dedicated tools and softwares used together, instead than a single mammoth app doing everything.
Again, you should also observe that Core is built on top of an instancing paradigm which will probably make HDi's rendering technology obsolete. Beside this speculations, i doubt Core will feature instancing placement tools as good as HDi's, so it could be another reason to focus on this part of the plugin.
I add something to my previous request: it would be nice if HDi feeds instancing placement to other engines too (Fry, Maxwell, etc).

Paolo

Hieron
08-31-2009, 06:31 PM
Mind sharing a little how you did that Hieron, or is it a trade secret?

Ah not at all. It is basically the tutorial as on the site of HDI itself but some additions.. Rendering an animation now, if that looks ok tomorrow I'll write a quick bit about it. And make the scene less noobish and upload it :)

The scene uses 8 MB of memory btw.. don't see usage go up upon rendering time either.. niiice.. With FFX memory took a huge hit with a scene like this.

fyffe
09-01-2009, 12:37 AM
I noticed that changing things in the say 2nd layer, made the 1st layer placement move!? :|

Grk! I thought I fixed that :eek: Anyway, you found the workaround.

The problem has to do with multiple instance layers when using weight maps, for sure. I'll have to take another look into it.

fyffe
09-01-2009, 12:41 AM
7.5 minutes render @ 1280x720

BTW, that is one HECK of a render you've got there.

fyffe
09-01-2009, 12:44 AM
Agreed. Come on Graham, how about it? You can only benefit from this right? :)

There was some talk about that a while ago. It is possible with HDI 1.8, but the issue would be with HDI 2.0, which generates instances on the fly instead of at the beginning of the render. So even if you only have position, rotation and scale for say 100 billion instances, you'll still need several terabytes of RAM just to store all that.

There was more recent talk of having KRay be able to use HDI as a volumetric plugin somehow... That might be more realistic.

archijam
09-01-2009, 12:59 AM
Graham: sounds great! The current instancing in kray is solid, but without the finesse of HD-I..

Hieron
09-01-2009, 02:35 AM
Wow... the animation works..
The result has serious issues regarding grass far away, it is 100% static when the camera is still, but when you move it ever so slightly, the result changes strongly. That is very normal I suppose, trying to sample zillions of leaves, there is bound to be issues. (how do other grass solutions fix that?) Note: this changing solution has nothing to do with the previous instances moving about, this is due to using say 5 pixels to sample 1 million leaves far away. Tried using motionblur etc but that does not help, best bet is to smooth out the resulting animation in post (see below :))

So I was a wee bit down, then I tossed it all incl depth maps into AE and applied some "Neat Video" to it.. and lo and behold, superstable. It is brilliant now..

Renders at 7.5 minutes per frame for 720p with a field that's 10.000 square meters (100x100) and has around 5 billion poly's. And no ram usage. And that is with GI and animation ready (with post tweaks)

Will put up the animation when it finishes, it is quite nice to see it work :)

Thanks Graham! The workaround works, (happy to have found it though) and looking forward to the fix.

Comped frame from animation:

http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/2538/grasscopy4.jpg


(notice the smooth background, this is due to slight DoF and very much due to that Neat Video plugin. That one is very recommended)


ps: for animation I took out the DP Infinite light and put in a Distant light. Hence the sharper shadows now, should not matter too much regarding rendertime though so will put back in later.

bjornkn
09-01-2009, 02:55 AM
I have another problem with 2.0.7. I have a scene where I have the same single SubD grass object instanced on 2 different objects.
The problem is that hDI appears to forget if the plugin is On or Off.
On the first object I can turn it off in the Object Properties, but it still renders.
On the other object it renders sometimes when On, but often it does not render any instances at all. Sometimes it helps to turn it off and back on, but not consistently.
It does not use any weight maps. Polygons on the first object and Surface on the other.
And only one layer of hDi on each object.
Never experienced such problems in other versions of hdInstance.

Hieron
09-01-2009, 05:19 AM
I have one issue though:

There is no way for me to influence the GI settings for the instancing objects, correct? In this scene the GI settings are rather low, they might not work in a arch-viz setup. Possibly I could use per object settings with higher GI settings for all the buildings in the scene to counter this but that seems tedious and perhaps a problem waiting to happen.

So:
Is there a way to use "per object" GI settings or similar for the instanced objects?

praa
09-01-2009, 07:21 AM
for the per object GI settings i was assuming that HDI took the settings of the source object into account ?

Graham, am i right in beleiving that ?

Hieron
09-01-2009, 07:27 AM
I thought the same but it seemed to not use that info.. I can try again, but was pretty sure about it.

MrWyatt
09-01-2009, 07:30 AM
for the per object GI settings i was assuming that HDI took the settings of the source object into account ?

Graham, am i right in believing that ?

I am not Graham, but I believe no. HDI also doesn't care what the settings are on cast shadow, receive shadows etc.

praa
09-01-2009, 07:45 AM
at least it should take into account the GI samples override in object properties (and the reflection rays number in texture) otherwise rendertimes are going to go thru the roof (which is not the case for me...)

Hieron
09-01-2009, 07:48 AM
Hmm k, I'll try and see, but didn't see a change before... (2.0.7 version)
Hope you're right, would be easier..

Lightwolf
09-01-2009, 07:50 AM
at least it should take into account the GI samples override in object properties (and the reflection rays number in texture) otherwise rendertimes are going to go thru the roof (which is not the case for me...)
But it can't. As far as LW is concerned it's rendering a volumetric effect, not items.

And plugins can't tweak the radiosity settings before evaluating the lighting due to radiosity.

Cheers,
Mike

Larry_g1s
09-01-2009, 09:29 AM
Stunning work Hieron!

Pavlov
09-01-2009, 11:10 AM
There was some talk about that a while ago. It is possible with HDI 1.8, but the issue would be with HDI 2.0, which generates instances on the fly instead of at the beginning of the render. So even if you only have position, rotation and scale for say 100 billion instances, you'll still need several terabytes of RAM just to store all that.

There was more recent talk of having KRay be able to use HDI as a volumetric plugin somehow... That might be more realistic.

Thanks for the answer.. which brings to another question: would it be feasible to extract HDi 1.8 placement tool only and distribute it as independent plugin for Kray users ?
I think some hundred Kray users would buy that tool - which hopefully should be cheaper than HDi itself.

thanks,
Paolo

Larry_g1s
09-01-2009, 11:15 AM
Thanks for the answer.. which brings to another question: would it be feasible to extract HDi 1.8 placement tool only and distribute it as independent plugin for Kray users ?
I think some hundred Kray users would buy that tool - which hopefully should be cheaper than HDi itself.

thanks,
Paololol, this was my thinking too. Maybe have two prices, one for those who already have the latest HDI version and those who don't, but want it for Kray.

3dworks
09-01-2009, 11:53 AM
...as another kray fan and tester, i simply would like to add another voice to those requesting some kray - hdinstance interaction. this would be simply awesome! ;)

cheers

markus

Hieron
09-01-2009, 12:50 PM
And attached to this message the 4 second moving camera through that landscape :)
6 to 7 minutes rendertime per frame on 720p.

Larry_g1s
09-01-2009, 12:59 PM
Man...really holds up nice Hieron. :thumbsup:
Did you make those blades of grass, clovers, etc.?

Hieron
09-01-2009, 01:13 PM
To stop invading this thread :devil: I started a seperate one about it in the LW 9.6 discussion forum. Included the scene file etc with that one too.

Would be very happy to hear your thoughts and improvements :)


Man...really holds up nice Hieron. :thumbsup:
Did you make those blades of grass, clovers, etc.?

Thanks, really appreciate it. And yeah, but check the files, they are supersimple :)