PDA

View Full Version : Magic FPrime



euge04
12-21-2004, 04:14 PM
I've new and been hearing a lot about FPrime. I was checking out the website and it looks pretty **** amazing.

Why is FPrime so much faster and better? Why doesn't Newtek build this kind of functionality into its products? I guess this would hurt the plug-in market?

Mylenium
12-21-2004, 11:56 PM
Why is FPrime so much faster and better? Why doesn't Newtek build this kind of functionality into its products?

FPrime is not better (quality wise), it's just faster in many situations. LW doesn't render this way since it is simply too "old". Adaptive hybrid rendering has been around only for a few years (papers were revealed on SIGGRAPH 2000, I think) and the core of LW is much older than this. It simply takes a while to adapt new techologies.


I guess this would hurt the plug-in market?

No, it wouldn't hurt the plugin market, if LW one day has such a thing natively. Plugin developers come and disappear again - it has been like this in the past and will be in the future. Mr. Worley is least likely to ever disappear. Even though I don't buy all this hype around him (sorry, he really is no guru), he is still a very smart programmer and will always have things to do and make money with them.

Mylenium

Panikos
12-22-2004, 12:54 AM
Mylenium, I agree partially with you.
Nobody is a God.

However you tend to devalue Worley very much.
Why there is so much distance between Worley and other plugin developers ?

Worley invented some procedurals textures among several other things.
(Ken Perlin got an Oscar for his procedurals)

Worley is one of the 4 writers of Texturing & Modeling : The Procedural Approach
which is the bible in its kind.

I wish many people were committed that much in their fields.

Mylenium
12-22-2004, 02:49 AM
My problem with Worley is not the guy himself - quite possibly he's one of the nicest people out there. I just hate it when people try to attribute things to him that he was not really involved with in the first place. There is a very unsound tendency to call him an inventor or magician which is simply not true. He is just a very smart person who, due to his extensive knowledge, is able to implement the latest developments and discoveries very quickly and perhaps take it a bit further, but not that much.

For the most part people also are forgetting that Worley just makes his money due to the built-in weaknesses of LW. Comments comming from people who don't know any other program than LW can only be considered onesided and much more than a little biased... It would really help such discussions, if people looked around a bit more before even starting such threads.

The only thing I really hate any Worley product for is the terrible interface design/ usability, but that would have to be a minor complaint compared to the rest.

Mylenium

Panikos
12-22-2004, 03:01 AM
Now we agree more :)

mattclary
12-22-2004, 05:24 AM
When you make a product that kicks a** and takes names, it's not hype.

And FYI, the LW core was re-written for [6], so no, it's not much older than 2000.

You could also ask yourself why Discreet didn't write Brazil. It takes a lot of man-power to keep a product current. I'm sure if Newtek had all the resources and money they would like (and didn't have to deal with the occasional mutiny), we would see a great product become a perfect product.

euge04
12-22-2004, 08:11 AM
What is Adaptive hybrid rendering?

JML
12-22-2004, 08:55 AM
Fprime is really good but I don't think it's so much more advanced than Lw render..
and right now, LW render can handle volumetrics, Fprime can't :) (joking, I know it's because of sdk,etc.. hopefully, it'll be fix soon)

Fprime looks like it is kind of like rendering with LW native render at
20*15 then 40*30 then 80*60 then 160*120, 320*240 then 640*480,etc...

it works fast but it's because the first picture you get back are really tiny resolution
images stretch to whatever resolution the Fprime window is set at..

it's great, Fprime is very useful,
I just don't think it's that much faster than Lw for most of the stuff, just a different way to show the render...

one of the problem why Fprime can't really be useful as a renderer is because
it can't render on networks...
until it get a network support, it's only a very nice previewer, not a professional renderer.
(and also until it support all LW features)

Panikos
12-22-2004, 09:00 AM
For blurred Reflections/Refractions and Radiosity,
Fprime compared to LW is like comparing a Ferrari with a mini couper

:eek:

JML
12-22-2004, 10:03 AM
For blurred Reflections/Refractions and Radiosity,
Fprime compared to LW is like comparing a Ferrari with a mini couper


are you talking about full resolution clean images? (not 320*240)
yes reflection is one thing that seems to be faster. radiosity... until they put something to reduce the noise in Fprime we can't really use it here. (need to wait
longer in Fprime to do what LW can do with the noise reduction plugin)
but then again, until Fprime is network compatible, we won't be able to use for any
of our projects, only as a previewer.
If I'm at home, I might use it as a renderer but not at work.

Matt
12-22-2004, 10:28 AM
Funny, I always thought FPrime radiosity was better than native LW.

One way around the network issue (and it is a work around) is to set each computer going with different frames, once started you can whip the dongle out to set another going. Not ideal but works if you're in a tight spot!

Have to say - I don't understand the distain of Worley, LightWave NEEDS developers of this calibre, we don't want to give them reasons to leave the LW platform (remember Joe Alter!)

Not saying we should bow at his knees, but he has helped the LW community enormously and we shouldn't forget that, remember he's also helping NT open up the SDK, admittedly with a view to making FPrime support more LW features but these changes will benefit all third-party developers.

ingo
12-22-2004, 10:35 AM
Actually FPrime Raydiosity is faster than LW Raydiosity. But since i use interpolated raydiosity for my interior renderings they are faster than a FPrime MonteCarlo raydiosity render. As long as you have a lot of reflections FPrime is faster too. BTW, does someone successfully work with Eki's Overcaster and FPrime ?

mattclary
12-22-2004, 10:37 AM
radiosity... until they put something to reduce the noise in Fprime we can't really use it here. (need to wait
longer in Fprime to do what LW can do with the noise reduction plugin)

Bullsh*t.

I've never had any problem avoiding noise.

http://www.newtek.com/products/lightwave/lw-gallery/displayimage.php?album=11&pos=4

http://vbulletin.newtek.com/showthread.php?t=26754

Panikos
12-22-2004, 11:55 AM
are you talking about full resolution clean images? (not 320*240)
.

I am talking about FilmRes rendering with radiosity.
I prefer the 2 hours clean images of FPrime than the noisy 16 hours LW images.

:p

hrgiger
12-22-2004, 12:35 PM
I honestly can't comment on the difference between a LW radiosity render and an FPrime radiosity render. The reason being, I've rarely let a LW radiosity render finish because it was taking so fricking long.

Matt
12-22-2004, 01:09 PM
I honestly can't comment on the difference between a LW radiosity render and an FPrime radiosity render. The reason being, I've rarely let a LW radiosity render finish because it was taking so fricking long.

Hehe! Good point! ;)

ingo
12-22-2004, 01:22 PM
I honestly can't comment on the difference between a LW radiosity render and an FPrime radiosity render. The reason being, I've rarely let a LW radiosity render finish because it was taking so fricking long.

Bah, nonsense ;) Just look at Otacons images, nice interpolated raydiosity renderings. You wont get any clean FPrime MC images in the same time.

hrgiger
12-22-2004, 01:36 PM
Bah, nonsense yourself ;) . Otacon doesn't rely solely on radiosity to render his images(at least in the lighting setups I've seen him share with us) and so his radiosity quality settings aren't as important. From what I remember, he uses area lights and does use an interpolated radiosity for fill. You're always going to have users with a better understanding of lighting and ways to achieve more realistic images with less time. My point was, if you're relying on a radiosity solution, Fprime in most cases wins hands down, especially in multi-bounce lighting.

hrgiger
12-22-2004, 02:32 PM
Then again, Fprime could be powered by Satan himself. Look at this info for a folder I'm keeping about 200 frames of an FPrime render in progress. Note the size in gigs...

Chazz
12-22-2004, 03:32 PM
And FYI, the LW core was re-written for [6], so no, it's not much older than 2000.


That's not a true statement, I believe the Lightwave Object file format was rewritten for L6, not the application itself.

Original1
12-22-2004, 04:34 PM
That's not a true statement, I believe the Lightwave Object file format was rewritten for L6, not the application itself.

As I understand it, but I may be wrong

LW 6 was an extensive rewrite of the program from the old code that had ported from the amiga, there were major changes to the rendering pipeline to allow the 128 bit render pipeline as it exists in the current versions, it was the first of the major apps to allow the use of HDRI (It took 3D max 2 - 3 years to catch up). It is however starting to show its age and the render engine is on occasions a little slow.

Still gives the best looking render though in my opinion

Chazz
12-22-2004, 06:58 PM
Lightwave 6 was not a rewrite of the older program, but more of a overhaul with big additions to the renderer and object format (vertex/weight maps, built-in morph targets and such) There was still code in the program from the 5.5 days.

Someday if they do rewrite it, we might get a built-in Fprime, perhaps even Brazil or Vray as an options.

Beamtracer
12-22-2004, 08:33 PM
I had great hopes for fprime, but was eventually disappointed.

Apart from SDK issues and the loss of image plug-ins, it screws up my textures. It doesn't seem to handle gradients right.

toby
12-22-2004, 09:07 PM
Unless you can render your entire animation in FPrime, it's only good for preview renders and only up to a certain point. If you do any tweaking in FPrime you may be wasting your time if you're rendering in Lightwave. It's a different renderer so it will always have differences.

The renders are dissimilar enough that I can never get in the habit of using it, and with things like 2 bounce radiosity it can make the entire interface really sluggish, so I'd rather just do small preview renders anyway. You can't see your previous test renders with FPrime either -

Karmacop
12-22-2004, 10:12 PM
If you have a problem with gradients, give a bug report to worley. Other than that, the sdk problems should be gone soon.

hrgiger
12-22-2004, 10:21 PM
Other than that, the sdk problems should be gone soon.

Are you basing this on anything in particular? Just curious because I would love to believe that.


You can't see your previous test renders with FPrime either.

How do you figure? Why can you save your renders? There is a save button on the preview renderer.
Also, 2 bounce is slowing down your interface significantly? Why don't you leave 2 bounce off until you go to make a final render? In my experience, even setting multi bounce to 3 or 4 (which I never would have done with LIghtwave in a million years which incidentally is how long that render would take) doesn't seem to make a significant difference then having it set to one or 2, except for the finished render.

JML
12-22-2004, 10:31 PM
Bullsh*t.

I've never had any problem avoiding noise.

http://www.newtek.com/products/lightwave/lw-gallery/displayimage.php?album=11&pos=4

http://vbulletin.newtek.com/showthread.php?t=26754

no offense mattclary, but I was relating to the kind of scenes I have to deal with at work, usually scenes with big amount of polys.
your lightsaber is nice, but we are not talking about the same kind of work.

also for room interiors as an example , when the ceiling is a pure color with no texture, it gets a lot harder to hide noise, and in this case, I was never able to use radiosity in interiors (Fprime or LWrender), too long to render a clean image.
(quick lighting baking would be perfect.)

Panikos
what kind of filmrez ? 2hours or 16 hours seems like a lot for a single image..
good luck rendering it :)
even if it take 2 hours with Fprime, are you rendering your film on one single computer?
you might want to optimize your scene in LW a little more and render it with LW render on a big farm.

I admit I need to play more with Fprime radiosity, but as I said until Fprime
is network, won't be able to use it at work, only for fun at home.

hrgiger
12-22-2004, 10:34 PM
JML, have you tried breaking up your scenes more via layers? I've noticed myself that just by doing that, Fprime seems quicker to render some scenes.

JML
12-22-2004, 10:55 PM
thanks hrgiger, I'll try that.

I'm using radiosity for a personal project at home, but I did not try to render it with Fprime yet, I'll try it tomorrow. no work tomorrow :)

(but one thing is that there are some volumetrics in the scene.. if it's worth it , I probably render it on a seperate pass though..)

Karmacop
12-22-2004, 11:16 PM
Are you basing this on anything in particular? Just curious because I would love to believe that.


I'm basing it on something someone said. This person would know, but they didn't say it straight, so I could be wrong, but I'm sure everyone is hoping ... and I think it's likely considering the amount of changes to the SDK for a 0.2 upgrade.

hrgiger
12-23-2004, 12:01 AM
I'm basing it on something someone said. This person would know, but they didn't say it straight, so I could be wrong, but I'm sure everyone is hoping

Wow Karma, I think that is the most vague thing I've ever heard. ;)

Panikos
12-23-2004, 12:48 AM
what kind of filmrez ? 2hours or 16 hours seems like a lot for a single image..
good luck rendering it :)
even if it take 2 hours with Fprime, are you rendering your film on one single computer?
you might want to optimize your scene in LW a little more and render it with LW render on a big farm.

Anamorphic Widescreen 1828x1556
I had some frames rendering in 80 hours on 1000MHz CPU with plain LW.
I have a farm of 20 CPUs and I am expanding it when my pocket allows so.
I've been working on this film for several years and my will and hope are steady.



:o

Karmacop
12-23-2004, 04:40 AM
I'm being vague because I don't want to get anyone in trouble :p

JML
12-23-2004, 06:38 AM
Anamorphic Widescreen 1828x1556
I had some frames rendering in 80 hours on 1000MHz CPU with plain LW.
I have a farm of 20 CPUs and I am expanding it when my pocket allows so.
I've been working on this film for several years and my will and hope are steady.


my boss would have an heart attack if he heard that :)
(he complains everytime a 720*486 rez image takes more than 8 min.. :)
(on a 3Ghz comp)

what kind of film you are doing ?

Panikos
12-23-2004, 08:22 AM
5 mins, one character, cool environment

It has all features of a long film, compact in 5 mins

toby
12-23-2004, 02:54 PM
How do you figure? Why can't you save your renders? There is a save button on the preview renderer.

Do you really want to stop what you're doing, hit save, navigate, select a file type, type a new name, open the image editor, hit load, navigate, every time you tweak a surface channel?



Also, 2 bounce is slowing down your interface significantly? Why don't you leave 2 bounce off until you go to make a final render?

Yes, when there's lots of subD's. If you light with only one bounce then switch to 2 your scene will be too bright. Believe me, If I had a choice I wouldn't be using radiosity at all for animations.

hrgiger
12-23-2004, 04:08 PM
Do you really want to stop what you're doing, hit save, navigate, select a file type, type a new name, open the image editor, hit load, navigate, every time you tweak a surface channel?

No, but then I wouldn't ever have the need to save a preview every time I tweak a surface channel. What options do you have with that regarding the lightwave renderer?


Yes, when there's lots of subD's. If you light with only one bounce then switch to 2 your scene will be too bright.

That's why you lower your intensity with more bounces.

toby
12-23-2004, 04:31 PM
Did you not know that the viewer holds on to test renders for you? You can also toggle through the layers with page-up and page-down.

"That's why you lower your intensity with more bounces."
So 2 bounce looks exactly the same as one bounce with the brightness turned up?? Do you really think you can light and texture with one bounce, then switch on 2 bounce and have it look right?

hrgiger
12-23-2004, 05:02 PM
I had heard that. I never use the viewer. It annoys me. It's like a pop-up without the ads. Before FPrime, I simply gave the RGB saver, a generic name and applied a number on the end for each preview I saved. But even that was a rare occurance because I never saved previews while texturing. Now with Fprime, all my previews are interactive and I rarely have a need to save a preview at all.

I've never come across an issue where my textures looked dramtically different under a different number of bounces especially if I compensate with intensity value. So I guess the answer to your last question would be yes.

pixym
12-25-2004, 10:51 PM
... radiosity... until they put something to reduce the noise in Fprime we can't really use it here. (need to wait
longer in Fprime to do what LW can do with the noise reduction plugin)
but then again, until Fprime is network compatible, we won't be able to use for any
of our projects, only as a previewer.
.

QUITE AGREE with that.