PDA

View Full Version : Arnold is moving to Subscription only



3D Kiwi
05-09-2017, 04:29 AM
https://www.solidangle.com/news/arnold-subscription-announcement/

erikals
05-09-2017, 07:05 AM
no surprise i guess, being AutoDesk

ianr
05-09-2017, 08:01 AM
https://www.solidangle.com/news/arnold-subscription-announcement/


Well,Well, Who would guessed that happening?

(Only the rest of the World's other CGI'ers)

jperk
05-09-2017, 09:30 AM
Ridiculous. I've used Arnold/ Maya 2017 Student version. Arnold is a good renderer. The subscription only module is killing it for me. It has forced me to move away from Autodesk. It's just getting to expensive.

Marander
05-09-2017, 10:44 AM
Crazy and sad to see. I considered Arnold for a while but now I'm glad I went for Vray (no activation required, bound to my serial number).

Niko3D
05-09-2017, 10:55 AM
Vray???

erikals
05-09-2017, 11:19 AM
would you chose Arnold instead of Octane?

just curious, i don't know much about Arnold.

edit: got some answers in these threads >
https://greyscalegorilla.com/tutorials/octane-vs-arnold-vs-physical-what-renderer-is-right-for-you
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=1339740

Marander
05-09-2017, 11:25 AM
Vray???

Yeah not for LW unfortunately.

136754

Marander
05-09-2017, 11:28 AM
would you chose Arnold instead of Octane?

If you don't have alot of GPU power and want to render on different render farms. And if the GPU memory is limiting you. Arnold is CPU only at the moment. Vray and Cycles have both CPU and GPU support.

MichaelT
05-09-2017, 11:57 AM
Hmm, I have octane for C4D already, I'll see if V-ray is bringing enough to the table to warrant a purchase. That said, if the license is tied to the serial key, it suddenly sounds very interesting.

Marander
05-09-2017, 03:34 PM
Hmm, I have octane for C4D already, I'll see if V-ray is bringing enough to the table to warrant a purchase. That said, if the license is tied to the serial key, it suddenly sounds very interesting.

Yes, when you submit your C4D serial you get a license file which you copy into your C4D folder, that's it.

There are tons of materials like Diffusion Shaders, Renderking, Tutorials&Beyond/3DRender&Beyond etc. and all models from cgaxis come in the native c4d and Vray4C4D format.

If you want to see some beautiful - no stunning - Vray4C4D renders:

http://www.3drenderandbeyond.com/

tischbein3
05-09-2017, 04:26 PM
Mhmm, the interesting thing about the current render market is that it is not set in stone like
the dcc market: There is a lot of movement going on. In the last few years we had vray as
the shooting star, then arnold then redshift.....going subscription only might actually work in
disfavour for solid angle...because there are alternatives out there

btw: You octane users should really push the development of a noise reduction method,
blenders cycles just got it: and although it introduces splotchy GI it _really_ reduces the amount of
samples needed to get a clean render. (50% less is not unusual..even more if you accept some quality losses )
(well currently it only works on stills, but they have the plan to integrate a time based noise reduction)

also I would wait and see what newtek has in the works before making a decission on a new renderer.

can't much say about vray, its cool, but the version I do have (blender) is a bit behind other releases
feature wise (no rt preview) so its a bit of a throwback usabillity wise.

jasonwestmas
05-09-2017, 04:30 PM
Subscription only is the stupidest idea ever for a render engine. There are so many options now.

So. . .agreed.

OlaHaldor
05-09-2017, 11:50 PM
would you chose Arnold instead of Octane?


We use Arnold at work. It's quite fast considering the amount of stuff going on in the shots. It does of course help to have dual xeon workstations (and tens of nodes in the farm) but it's quite cool to see these heavy things chug through at 10-15 minutes per frame.

I tried a single asset in Octane on a GTX 1080. Due to the amount of polygons and UDIMs it took about the time for Arnold to load into memory and finish a render until Octane even started.


I think Octane is great for relatively simple things. But the moment you go into a production like this (Elias, I'm sure you as a Norwegian know what that is), Octane wouldn't survive for long.

Perhaps the other way to deal with it would be rendering in many layers. 2-3 foreground layers, then a couple of background layers. It would mean a whole lot of extra work to set up the rendering though.

MichaelT
05-10-2017, 01:13 AM
We use Arnold at work. It's quite fast considering the amount of stuff going on in the shots. It does of course help to have dual xeon workstations (and tens of nodes in the farm) but it's quite cool to see these heavy things chug through at 10-15 minutes per frame.

I tried a single asset in Octane on a GTX 1080. Due to the amount of polygons and UDIMs it took about the time for Arnold to load into memory and finish a render until Octane even started.


I think Octane is great for relatively simple things. But the moment you go into a production like this (Elias, I'm sure you as a Norwegian know what that is), Octane wouldn't survive for long.

Perhaps the other way to deal with it would be rendering in many layers. 2-3 foreground layers, then a couple of background layers. It would mean a whole lot of extra work to set up the rendering though.

But that is only for the first frame right? After it is loaded (like in an animation) I would think that Octane picks up the speed, compared with Arnold?

samurai_x
05-10-2017, 01:16 AM
Subscription as in rental for Arnold? Lol!
Redshift, vray will get more users.


Subscription/rental really sucks. You have no control! I'm sticking to non subscription software. Make portable versions and run on VMware. :D





http://steamcommunity.com/app/243580/discussions/0/1319961618834507282/

"Autodesk Maya LT is no longer available for subscription on Steam as of April 21, 2017. To continue using Maya LT, please visit Autodesk[www.autodesk.com] to subscribe.

If you have a subscription of Maya LT via Steam, you will be able to use your product until the subscription end date.
Should you require support for your Maya LT contract via Steam, please reach out to Steam support.



What is happening to Maya LT on Steam?
As of April 21, 2017, users will no longer be able to purchase new subscriptions or renew subscriptions of Maya LT through Steam. After that date, you can subscribe to Maya LT directly through Autodesk by visiting the Maya LT web page[www.autodesk.com], or subscribing here[www.autodesk.com].

After April 21, 2017, existing subscribers of Maya LT through Steam will continue to have access to Maya LT through Steam for the remaining duration of their subscription.


What subscription offerings are available for Maya LT through Autodesk?
Maya LT is available in a monthly, annual, and multi-year subscriptions. For more information on the pricing for the different subscription options, visit the Maya LT Subscribe[www.autodesk.com] page.


Do I need to re-install Maya LT when I subscribe through Autodesk?
Yes, users who formerly accessed Maya LT through a Steam subscription need to subscribe through Autodesk[www.autodesk.com] and re-install Maya LT.


Can I use files created in Maya LT through Steam with the regular version of Maya LT?
Yes, files created, edited, or saved in Maya LT on Steam are compatible with the regular version of Maya LT.


Is support available with a Maya LT subscription through Autodesk?
Yes, every Autodesk subscriber gets Basic Support, which provides web-based access to Autodesk technical support resources. For more information, click here[www.autodesk.com]"

OlaHaldor
05-10-2017, 01:26 AM
But that is only for the first frame right? After it is loaded (like in an animation) I would think that Octane picks up the speed, compared with Arnold?



Good point. I've not even bothered to test animation on a heavy asset like that with Octane. I could of course perform a test.
I might be mistaken, but the few times I've had to do animation and render in Octane, I've had to enable "reload every frame" kind of thing, which then forces Octane to load from scratch again every single frame.

Last time I rendered anything in Octane it was with Modo, which isn't as fluid and streamlined as Octane in LightWave. I'll give it a shot.

MichaelT
05-10-2017, 01:53 AM
Good point. I've not even bothered to test animation on a heavy asset like that with Octane. I could of course perform a test.
I might be mistaken, but the few times I've had to do animation and render in Octane, I've had to enable "reload every frame" kind of thing, which then forces Octane to load from scratch again every single frame.

Last time I rendered anything in Octane it was with Modo, which isn't as fluid and streamlined as Octane in LightWave. I'll give it a shot.

Hmm, I think in the latest release docs (which I normally never read :) ) I think it stated that they got rid of the reload every frame option, and replaced it with update changes. If they did that, I kind of suspect that enough people reloaded everything, and completely missed the point of the speed up. But again, I have to check... but I think that is what it said.

EDIT: Hmm, can't find it. Anyway... that option isn't there in my build. I can only choose to update changes.

And I don't have a big scene to test on (nor do I have time to build one) but a simple scene is indeed very fast to render in Octane. This small animation test, took ~10 minutes. All 90 frames, to a video.
136757
136756 (135kb - mp4)

OlaHaldor
05-10-2017, 03:15 AM
Yeah that's nothing what we have going though.
(You don't need a facebook user to see this video)
https://www.facebook.com/eliasfilmen/videos/229425220876376/

All assets (except bg mountains) are mostly 2 CC subdivs minimum, some assets are more depending on the base shape. There's literally somewhere between 600-800 UDIMs in these sequence, with have 5-6 maps per UDIM.



I would of course LOVE to see someone do a scene like that with Octane. It would be inspiring as heck.

MichaelT
05-10-2017, 04:34 AM
:) That's a lot of texture information. How much memory are we talking about? The cc count, is much less of a concern. Although I am wondering if you really need that much information, sounds a bit too much? But then again, I have no idea what resolution you're going for etc..

OlaHaldor
05-10-2017, 05:27 AM
All I can say is we've had our share of texture resolution problems. Solution: more UDIMs, higher res textures.
I don't recall seeing any hard numbers, but the render farm is using anything between 24-64GB depending on complexity.

MichaelT
05-10-2017, 07:47 AM
Hmm, I see. I'm assuming that is for the whole farm, so per node it is a lot less (without asking how big your setup is. That is usually sensitive information) still, I'm curious as how it would affect an animation in Octane. I think I will just try and mash whatever together and simply test where the limits are.

MichaelT
05-10-2017, 11:25 AM
Whoah!! :O I did a test like I said, not only was the memory maxed out, but the heat it generated... I need to improve the cooling. Holy "# I god scared there. And the time it takes to finish.... Let's not go there again.. I definitely need to look into V-Ray.

erikals
05-10-2017, 12:00 PM
what was the scene file like?
try to use 256color .png textures by the way. takes 1/3rd of the memory (at least in LightWave)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFccG3v5ei8

instancing should be no problem.
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?141001-Octane-render-for-Lightwave-2-0&p=1419188&viewfull=1#post1419188

this makes me wonder, how many polys did the scene use?

are you using Octane 2 or 3?

MichaelT
05-10-2017, 12:19 PM
I found a scene on the net that is free, but it was for C4D. Didn't matter since the test was for octane.. and that scene is octane only.
I would try LW, but when it comes to complex scenes for LW, I could not find one. I used this one if it is of interest (it free for all uses, but again, C4D + Octane only) :

http://www.beeple-crap.com/resources.php <-- A treasure trove of good stuff.

Would love to see a LW full production scene though.. too many people keep things to themselves :(

Oh, and I use Octane 3. Polys? Hmm, didn't check that.. but many.

erikals
05-10-2017, 12:46 PM
MEASURE ONE --- MEASURE FOUR --- MEASURE SEVEN
MEASURE TWO --- MEASURE FIVE --- MID-SECTION
MEASURE THREE --- MEASURE SIX --- OPENING SHOTS

what puzzles me is the enormous size of those C4D files. combined they are like 5-6GB...

MichaelT
05-10-2017, 02:05 PM
Textures, lots of them. I needed that to burn Octane, and it really does :)

erikals
05-10-2017, 02:22 PM
yeah, there's no reason at all for that scene to have 5GB of textures though...

an extreme overload imo.

MichaelT
05-10-2017, 03:46 PM
Yeah no doubt, many of the things in there don't really need textures at all even. But like I said, I wanted to burn the Octane and give it a run for its money. And when loaded like that, doing the render using CPU is actually a lot faster. Also, Octane handles poor lighting really badly.

graviel
05-12-2017, 07:05 AM
Autodesk is pure joy, well.. just another platform not to bother about learning :D

I will drop a serious and wild idea, shall we crowd-fund and purchase messiah's renderer (based on Arnold) and open source it?. They deserve it.

jasonwestmas
05-12-2017, 07:13 AM
Autodesk is pure joy, well.. just another platform not to bother about learning :D

I will drop a serious and wild idea, shall we crowd-fund and purchase messiah's renderer (based on Arnold) and open source it?. They deserve it.

Nah, people aren't fans of what pmg did. The name is tainted. The whole thing would have to be rebranded and given over to some other company.