PDA

View Full Version : World class rendering in 8



HM1X
12-06-2003, 06:22 PM
Has anyone seen previews of the rendering. Better than Renderman? I hope so! :cool:

hrgiger
12-06-2003, 06:58 PM
This is the only render I've seen from 8 so far....

S.Beres
12-06-2003, 06:58 PM
World Class Render in features list = no changes :))) still slow and still far away behind VRay , Mental , etc.... :mad:

EyesClosed
12-06-2003, 07:03 PM
Originally posted by HM1X
Has anyone seen previews of the rendering. Better than Renderman? I hope so! :cool:

Haha! That'll never happen.

TyVole
12-06-2003, 07:13 PM
Proton posted a complex architectural render, which was done incredibly fast on a P4 2.8 machine.

Of course, faster doesn't mean better.

Castius
12-06-2003, 07:24 PM
I woudl just like to take this time to say bibitty blaaa blaa blaaa.

WizCraker
12-06-2003, 07:51 PM
Originally posted by EyesClosed
Haha! That'll never happen.

For once I actually agree with you on this.


There is something you have to understand Renderman was developed to do one thing and that is to Render [obviously the name gives it away] LW is a multi function application, yes the LW render is great but it was not designed for just that. Renderman has a team of developers customizing it and tweaking it for it to be more powerful. So what you are asking will most likely not happen in the LW renderer.

SplineGod
12-06-2003, 08:42 PM
Originally posted by HM1X
Has anyone seen previews of the rendering. Better than Renderman? I hope so! :cool:
Better? Not exactly sure what that means. Lightwave STILL has one of the best renderers out there and it comes standard with LW. Plus unlimited render nodes at no extra cost. You can probably get several seats of LW for the cost of one renderman node. :) In terms of quality check out this thread.
http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=106641

HM1X
12-06-2003, 08:52 PM
In that case, LW 8 touts, "Easy integration with other effects production tools."

I hope this means no more LightMan plugin required for Renderman. :cool:

LNT
12-06-2003, 08:59 PM
still slow and still far away behind VRay , Mental , etc

hmm...while I agree that lw is slower at computing radiosity or doing the antialiasing I would still not say it is far behind any other rendering engine

afterall,speeding up radiosity or AA is just a matter of optimizing the computing algorithm and I believe newtek will improve that a lot next time they work on the renderer

on the other hand, the core bit depth at which the colour and shading are coded to compute I wouldnt swap for any other renderer,lightwave has that remarkable balance between the beauty and lifelike realism of its images everyone must respect


I think it's justa matter of updating the code after a long while

HM1X
12-06-2003, 09:47 PM
Originally posted by SplineGod
Better? Not exactly sure what that means. Lightwave STILL has one of the best renderers out there and it comes standard with LW. Plus unlimited render nodes at no extra cost. You can probably get several seats of LW for the cost of one renderman node. :) In terms of quality check out this thread.
http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=106641

I generally agree with this.

I was also going through some of the threads with the link you provided. Lots of discussion about Lightwave and other application cg looking "real" or not "real."

I think the question these guys are posing is somewhat academic. For those who immerse themselves in cg all day (like working on sci fi film/television productions), or to someone with a trained eye, cg will be perceived as "not real," cuz it's not.

I think the importance is in what looks "good" to people; both the artists who create the graphics, and to the casual consumer who watches the graphics. If both sets of people are pleased with what they create/see, where's the problem?

Another factor is that we don't know what the "real thing" looks like. In other words, until I can go out into space in a shuttle craft, and see what the Enterprise actually looks like floating there in space, I will not "know" what the real enterprise looks like, with all its micro-nuances of light, shadow, and what I call "visual harmonics." So for now, models and cg are an accurate enough representation. :cool:

Cman
12-06-2003, 10:53 PM
.

EyesClosed
12-06-2003, 11:35 PM
hmm...while I agree that lw is slower at computing radiosity or doing the antialiasing I would still not say it is far behind any other rendering engine

Well, considering LW's renderer hasn't had a significant update in years, and the fact that technology development is so rapid, I would say LW's renderer is behind a considerable amount.

Most renderers now come stardard (part of the renderer, not a plugin) with volumetric subsurface scattering, volume caustics, absorption, dispersion, diffraction, etc.

LW's renderer not only lacks newer (even old) technology, but some of the most important features in LW are rather poor -- like anti aliasing, motion blur, dof, texture filtering, quality radiosity, GI, and caustics, etc.

Clearly, LW's renderer is pretty good, but far from the best by today's standards (mental ray or PRMan). Even Brazil and Final Render make the weaknessess of LW's renderer apparent.

Anyway, if you need a good renderer cheap, then LW's renderer is just what you need. :D

SplineGod
12-07-2003, 12:28 AM
Originally posted by EyesClosed
Well, considering LW's renderer hasn't had a significant update in years, and the fact that technology development is so rapid, I would say LW's renderer is behind a considerable amount.

Most renderers now come stardard (part of the renderer, not a plugin) with volumetric subsurface scattering, volume caustics, absorption, dispersion, diffraction, etc.

LW's renderer not only lacks newer (even old) technology, but some of the most important features in LW are rather poor -- like anti aliasing, motion blur, dof, texture filtering, quality radiosity, GI, and caustics, etc.

Clearly, LW's renderer is pretty good, but far from the best by today's standards (mental ray or PRMan). Even Brazil and Final Render make the weaknessess of LW's renderer apparent.

Anyway, if you need a good renderer cheap, then LW's renderer is just what you need. :D

The fact that LWs render may or may not have been updated in years only tells me how far behind the others have been.

Granted several renderers come with impressive features but the point is that they are standalone renderers. Lightwave is a good solid renderer with LOTS of other features the others done have.

Maya comes with Mental Ray...NOW.. but apparently all its features arent implemented yet. What does it cost to actually get mental ray rendering nodes? What about renderman? Part of the issue IMO is not just output or features but what does it REALLY cost to set up, feature for feature what Lightwave does?

The reality is that when you consider the big picture...ie. the actual cost to setup even a small studio with anything besides LW and you factor in all the hidden costs, LW is still overall a great way to go. :)

Yog
12-07-2003, 05:12 AM
Originally posted by SplineGod


The reality is that when you consider the big picture...ie. the actual cost to setup even a small studio with anything besides LW and you factor in all the hidden costs, LW is still overall a great way to go. :)

"Actual costs" is a two edged sword.

OK, Vray for MAX (unlimited render nodes) cost me an extra $400 (at the time), but for architectual renders using GI I can get much more impressive results than LW in a fraction of the time (10-60 times faster depending on whether I have 1 or 2 bounces enabled in LW).

So going by the adage that "time is money" (very true when your back is against the wall on deadlines), the "Actual costs" work out far cheeper for me to use Vray+MAX for rendering.

I still use LW for all my modelling, but as models can be a pain in the a**** to get into MAX (mainly MAX's fault), this may change. Especially as LW's modelling tools have also stood still for years, and also in light of a number of standalone modellers that are coming onto the market all the time.

The time is soon coming where myself, and several others in similar circumstances, have to decide which is the best route forward, stick to a single program that does everything to an "OK" standard, or to assemble my own workflow set-up from a number of standalone programs that I can customise to the exact way I want to work and ends up a lot faster ?

Elmar Moelzer
12-07-2003, 05:38 AM
Hey Yog!
I am working with a few Max- houses doing mainly modeling for them. I usually export wavefront *. obj- files and have them impoort into Max (if I am not mistaken one needs a 3rd- party- plugin for that on the Max- side though).
Works like a charm!

That said, LWs renderer is still one of the best.
I have always had good results from it. IMHO it has got that "instant good looking" which makes it really easy to set up great looking scenes (which is not that easy in other renderers)
It should be a tad faster though...
CU
Elmar

Yog
12-07-2003, 05:46 AM
Hi Elmar.

Yep I use the OBJ format as well, I find it's the best for keeping quads and mapping co-ordinates intact. I use Deep Explorer for the LW->Obj coversion as I have not had great success doing it straight from LW.

Another advantage of using Deep Explorer is that it coverts all LW's standard (non UV) mapping styles (planar, spherical, cylindrical) into UV maps on the fly.

Elmar Moelzer
12-07-2003, 05:57 AM
Despite for the projected mapping- types, the path from LW works very well.
Not sure why you havent got much luck with that. LWs exporter certainly is doign a good job, not sure whats the problem on the MAx- side.
I would really try the way over the fbx- format once. It seems to be pretty good (thoug pretty large).
Anyone tried it with MAX yet?
CU
Elmar

Yog
12-07-2003, 07:08 AM
The LW exporting OBJ files is mainly that of mapping, like you say it doesn't handle some form of mapping well.

The problems on the MAX side are mainly of scale, smoothing and materials.
Once you have the right scale factor set up it's not too much of a problem, unless for any reason you have to change the system units, which sends you back to square one.
I've found that although MAX recognises smoothing groups from Obj files it doesn't automatically apply them. Easilly corrected manually, but I'd rather it was automatic.
The materials issue is that it lumps all the LW textures under one sub-object texture. Not too much of a concern, just wish it wouldn't.

I have tried the FBX route for transfer into MAX. It's not too bad for objects under say 2000 polys, but give it 50,000+ polys and the chances are that it will crash each time.

trick
12-07-2003, 07:22 AM
Renderman is more about stability, shader language and consistent behaviour over multiple frames.

Doing a lot of architectural animations there are a lot of sitiuations where I would like to see anti-aliasing algorhythms that take frames around the current one into consideration, to prevent artifacts in small details. For stills I'm very pleased with LW's results. For doing flickerfree animations you have to come up with a lot of workarounds both in modelling, animation and compositing...Renderman is something I just can not afford...but then again there must always be something you can dream about...

Elmar Moelzer
12-07-2003, 08:10 AM
Hey Trick!
I am not sure what you mean, but you should maybe try using motionblur...
CU
Elmar

Cman
12-07-2003, 09:42 AM
Originally posted by Yog
The time is soon coming where myself, and several others in similar circumstances, have to decide which is the best route forward, stick to a single program that does everything to an "OK" standard, or to assemble my own workflow set-up from a number of standalone programs that I can customise to the exact way I want to work and ends up a lot faster ?

Very deep...

Dick Ma
12-07-2003, 11:35 AM
Why LW8 doesn't upgrade in Balance? Too concentrated in Animation tools and ... I think lack of development in Lights and Rendering.....

hrgiger
12-07-2003, 12:55 PM
Originally posted by Dick Ma
Why LW8 doesn't upgrade in Balance? Too concentrated in Animation tools and ... I think lack of development in Lights and Rendering.....

First of all, there probably are improvements in Lights and Rendering, we just don't know what they are yet. Just because we only know of improvements in character animation tools and such, doesn't mean that everything has been revealed.
Having said that, the focus has been on character animation tools because Lightwave has been lacking good CA tools for so long.
There is still stuff to see yet, just wait and see...

Yog
12-07-2003, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by hrgiger
First of all, there probably are improvements in Lights and Rendering, we just don't know what they are yet. Just because we only know of improvements in character animation tools and such, doesn't mean that everything has been revealed.
Having said that, the focus has been on character animation tools because Lightwave has been lacking good CA tools for so long.
There is still stuff to see yet, just wait and see...

Unfortunately people at both the Canadian and New York LW8 previews WERE told there were NO improvements to rendering.

Whilst I applaud Newtek for improving an area of the program that many have seen to have been lacking, I'm not so happy that over the last few years it has been done at the expence of the area of the program that I actually use, i.e. modelling and rendering.

Dick Ma
12-07-2003, 01:30 PM
Well what I feel about Newtek is LOTS of people rush to enhance the character tools while nobody works on lights and rendering. The third parties works more in the shaders technologies but ....you know Lighting and Rendering is the core of LW and nobody outside Newtek can touch and improve that. And there seem to be no, or hard to export settings in LW to third party renderers.

LW7 lacks of character rigging and animation tools and LW8 improves that. And will the next generation of LW improves its lights and rendering tools while keep animation tools with on more improvement?

Just feel that the upgrade of LW8 is lack of balance in improvement.

WizCraker
12-07-2003, 01:40 PM
Originally posted by SplineGod
[B]What about renderman? Part of the issue IMO is not just output or features but what does it REALLY cost to set up, feature for feature what Lightwave does?

The good news Pixar dropped the price of Renderman down to only $3500. Not sure if that only includes 1 rendering node or not.

hrgiger
12-07-2003, 03:44 PM
Originally posted by Yog
Unfortunately people at both the Canadian and New York LW8 previews WERE told there were NO improvements to rendering.



I've heard this one before. Somebody claiming to have been told something by a Newtek in the know about what was or was not going to be in Lightwave 8(which by the way turned out to be completely false). If you have the name of a Newtek employee who said such a thing, then present that now, otherwise, it's pretty much heresay. They haven't fully unveiled Lightwave 8 to the public anywere so I doubt that's solid information.
We still don't know what what all the improvements to LW are yet. Andrew Cross said in 3D world magazine hinted at an increase in rendering speed, but remainted guarded, so that might suggest that something has been done.
It's too early to be complaining about what we didn't get in Lightwave 8 yet.

takkun
12-07-2003, 07:29 PM
At the Toronto LW8 demo, supposedly this guy was told that rendering improvements are being worked on and they won't surface till 8.5. He also mentioned that Newtek might be making a deal with Splutterfish to make it so that Brazil R/S could work with Lightwave. :eek:

Probably just a rumour, but a good one at that. :)

http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=872103&highlight=brazil#post872103

hrgiger
12-07-2003, 08:23 PM
I could see the improvements to the renderer coming in a point release after ver8 comes out. I think the focus, as we all know, will be on character animation tools and I think rightly so. I know that these tools aren't as important for some people as is the render engine or even modeler, but I think you'll find a majority of users pretty happy about version 8. Once these new tools are out (and I have it on good authority that there is at least one more secret tool we don't know about yet), I think you'll see focus turn to other important areas of Lightwave especially the renderer and modeler.

SteveM
12-07-2003, 08:40 PM
I am relatively new to LW (since 7.0) but historically are substantive features such as these enhancements added in a point release? The new features in 7.5 were nice, but nothing ground breaking. Only asking - not being critical.

hrgiger
12-07-2003, 09:42 PM
Look back to version 6 to 6.5. You'll see it was pretty significant.

Here's an excerpt I found describing the jump from 6 to 6.5:

"Version 6.5 optimizes LightWave’s stability and speed throughout the program with the addition of hundreds of new features. Many games-specific tools for the games industry have been included. Users now have more surfacing control with Continuous and Discontinuous UV Mapping, UV texture Atlas for automated, complex UV mapping, Light and texture baking options and open GL transparency and enhanced texturing. LightWave’s superb IK (bones) system has gotten even better, with bone deformations up to 40 times faster, while greatly enhanced character tools mean less need for plug-ins. There is also a powerful new integrated expressions system, and the integrated particle system now includes emitters, custom nozzles, particle properties, launch behaviors, and collision options. There is direct connection with Hypervoxels 3 particle rendering engine, as well as improvements to Hypervoxels (for explosions, liquids, and other effects), like fast 2D sprite mode. The Motion Designer Soft Body Dynamics engine has been invisibly integrated into the 6.5 interface, allowing simulations to be done interactively with other scene elements, even the Particle system."

blantyre
12-07-2003, 09:55 PM
Lightwave is to Rendering -- As -- Leica is to Digital Camera

XSI is to Rendering -- As -- Water is to Ocean

Renderman is to Rendering -- As -- Pixar is to 3D

Lightwave Rendering Class is to Rendering -- As -- Isabella Rosselini is to Lacome (still beautiful to look at but getting old)

My 2 Cents

Hervé
12-08-2003, 02:38 AM
Hey I still love Isabella R. more than any young geeky valley girl or the now Fat Brittney S.

We usually say ..... "you cook the best soup in the old casserole..." he he...

(note : I dont say LW is an old casserole.)

Cheers.

Brazil, huh, why not renderman.... ?

blantyre
12-08-2003, 02:48 AM
:D LOL, I love the lady too but masses want something fresh

something like Canada's great export Estella Ward. if the analogy ever comes true, I'd be in heaven.

Lightwave is to Rendering -- As -- Brazil is to South America
BLISSSSSSS

Lightwolf
12-08-2003, 02:59 AM
Hi there,
lemme add my ,02 euro cents:

I do agree that LW has a beautiful renderer, but I doubt that any major changes will be made in 8.
While BIG features like a more modern GI approach would be nice, there are plenty of basics where I find LW's renderer is lacking as well.
* Texture filtering - is abyssmal to say the least. Area51 having to use gradients to blend away their textures towards the distance to prevent crawlies? That shouldn't be neccessary, and it isn't with most other renderers (heck, even Maya's native renderer has decent texture filtering).
* Basically this goes for reflection/refraction/projection maps as well. Did anybody every notice how bad they can look?
* Shadow maps should be applyable to more light types, deep shadow would be nice as well. While not as fancy as GI, they would save my day so often (on tigh deadlines)... Oh, just think of deep shadow maps and volumetrics :) ....
* Hmm, I'd still love to see more reflection mapping typs, as well as automatic reflection map generation. Again, this is not a high-end feature, and may be regarded a step back, but could be soooo useful in production.

As for renderman:
I would love to see LW adopt RIB in the future (yeah, like V10 or so), have LW write out rib, and lwsn use them. That way third party (rib compatible) renderers could be used easily, and also, lwsn could be used from other packages as a renderman replacement. Well, and writing shaders directly in the surface editor would be a sweet thing as well, but I'm wandering off.

Cheers,
Mike

trick
12-08-2003, 03:45 AM
Originally posted by Elmar Moelzer
Hey Trick!
I am not sure what you mean, but you should maybe try using motionblur...
CU
Elmar

Motion blur is not the same as AA. Today's algorhythms look at the 4, 8, 16, etc.neighbooring pixels in 2D space in the current image. By the speed in an animation the outcome of this averaging can be inconsistent over multiple frames. Taking the previous and the next image into account and an estimation of the changes that take place you can create a 3D sampling space of 4x2, 4x4...8x2, 8x4...16x2, 16x4...etc pixels. Flickering mostly is visible when motion is slow: the visibility of a small element in one frame can be completely different from that in a next frame simply because it covers other pixels (maybe 3 in one frame and 4 or even 5 in the next frame). Keep in mind this is not about faster rendering, just about better rendering...Renderman is not the fastest one....

Hervé
12-08-2003, 03:56 AM
first let me say LightWolf, that I never use LW reflections, they are sooo bad.... ahhhhhrrrggghh ADDITIVE, very bad, this is not the way reflections are in real life.... I use HyperSmooth.... there is an entire world just for reflections where the LW user out of the box has nothing... (almost nothing....)

Example.... try to remove lwo values from being reflective.... hard core.... high values and low values reflect the same in LW....

Ad for texture filtering, yes I had to deal with that as well.... the hell.... when you think all you have left is to push F10, the real work is in fact starting.... he he he.... well maybe in 8.5, I could eventually wait to there....

Cheers

Hervé
12-08-2003, 06:01 AM
Open the doors to Brazil, I am coming back from their gallery, and jeeeezz, LW "renderer" is behind, no too far..... well I dunno how hard it is to make a render app like that, all I know it must be "woaw", coz I am using a lot of third party plugs to make images that are, well you decide.....

Brazil, I loved that movie, I love even more the render app......

Emmanuel
12-08-2003, 06:08 AM
Hi,

my eyes could be wrong, but could it be that the image shows some sort of new subpixel displacement mapping on the cloth of the two Ninjas ?
Cause it doesn't show on the OpenGL preview, but on the rendered image You can see it, I am not sure, it looks like the contours ARE displaced which would hint at a displacement instead of a simple bump
map....

Hervé
12-08-2003, 06:16 AM
I zoomed this render in Photoshop, but it does not look like, or maybe this render is not very convincing.... but I could be wrong...