PDA

View Full Version : hrmmm, NVIDIA Hardware Rendering Now Native in Softimage|XSI



hairy_llama
06-16-2003, 03:46 PM
Now I am angry. :o I really hope we get this in lw soon. :D

harhar
06-16-2003, 04:35 PM
Lightwave only support openGL as of now.

DaveW
06-16-2003, 05:14 PM
You can do hardware rendering with OpenGL.

TyVole
06-16-2003, 05:19 PM
Maya also has sweet hardware rendering. I saw it demonstrated. A 640 x 480 image takes just as long to render as a 4K image. Amazing.

Exper
06-17-2003, 08:49 AM
Come on NT... support HardwareRendering + Cg!!! :cool:

Look at:
http://www.cgshaders.org/shaders
for some interesting Cg shaders. ;)

Bye.

meshmaster
06-17-2003, 10:48 AM
http://tw.nvidia.com/view.asp?IO=Cg_FAQ_CHT


DCC applications and tools vendors, like Right Hemisphere’s Deep Exploration product, Alias|Wavefront Maya, Discreet 3ds max, SOFTIMAGE|XSI and NewTek LightWave 3D, are embedding Cg into the digital artist’s workflow.

Why would Nvidia put this statement on their site if there are no plans by Newtek?!?

Exper
06-17-2003, 11:07 AM
Originally posted by meshmaster
Why would Nvidia put this statement on their site if there are no plans by Newtek?!? NT probably has plans about supporting Cg; I don't think nVIDIA needs a false line about NT support! ;)

Bye.

Elmar Moelzer
06-17-2003, 11:17 AM
I really only consider this interesting for previews, I am not too sure about high- quality- rendering. Anyway, it would be great to ahve that as an option, like we had with RenderGL back in LW 5.6 (yes NT was ahead its time, too far ahead in this case though).
CU
Elmar

Exper
06-17-2003, 11:36 AM
Elmar Moelzer...
another sad story about NT's small-vision of world!!! :(

If we consider power/year comparison... LW5.6 is far a lot better than LW7.5c :(

I think Cg & HardwareRendering is really useful for fast-rendering/visualization and for Games development.

Bye.

Valter
06-17-2003, 01:36 PM
Originally posted by Exper
Elmar Moelzer...
another sad story about NT's small-vision of world!!! :(

If we consider power/year comparison... LW5.6 is far a lot better than LW7.5c :(

I think Cg & HardwareRendering is really useful for fast-rendering/visualization and for Games development.

Bye.

I agree. unfortunately is true:( :(

CB_3D
06-17-2003, 02:54 PM
Originally posted by TyVole
Maya also has sweet hardware rendering. I saw it demonstrated. A 640 x 480 image takes just as long to render as a 4K image.

Well, that´s a feature i wouldn´t want...4x the rendertime... :-)
But seriously, who wouldn´t want everything to be faster and better? No poll needed to know the outcome :-)

Ahh, this will be fun. Now let´s begin to post realtime radiosity on the feature wishlist for L9, LOL!

Arnie Cachelin
06-17-2003, 05:01 PM
I seem to recall that Maya has been using HW rendering for their particle systems, and other stuff for quite some time. The downside, which prevents this great demo feature from being useful in production, is that your renderfarm machines suddenly need souped-up display cards with enough memory to accomodate your render resolution. There is no alternate SW rendering path for these items, so your production quality is limited to the quality available from realtime cards, and your rneders can depend on which HW your machine has, which is another downfall for renderfarms or larger facilities.

mattc
06-17-2003, 09:36 PM
Another fine reality check from Arnie. ;)

Regards
Matt

jin choung
06-17-2003, 11:26 PM
let's not all get our panties in a bunch,

first, what this is NOT is a means of using video card hardware to do F9 or non real time renders.

XSI may include some functionality to record the real-time playback but this is not essentially a NON GAME DEVELOPER tool.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

what it essentially IS is on par with being able to see lens flares and motion blur in the OPEN GL window!

if you haven't noticed, games use a lot of pretty fancy techniques these days involving dumping TRANSFORM & LIGHTING to the fixed function video card hardware to render like hell in real time on your screen.

also of late, they've been using special VERTEX PROGRAMS (very similar to our vertex maps) and PIXEL PROGRAMS (similar to our pixel filters.... BTW, all these 'PROGRAMS' are called SHADERS in real time parlance) to do a lot of effects that before were only possible by doing F9 renders.

this is PRIMARILY AN ISSUE OF JUST SEEING LOTS OF NEATO EFFECTS in your INTERFACE WINDOW!

unless you want your stuff to look like game footage (and as good as it is right now, it's not quite jurassic park yet), it's not gonna help much in your production if you're not in games.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i AM in games. and it would benefit me a lot. we spend a great deal of time simply exporting things out of non-rt apps like maya into proprietary apps that we use to do final texturing as it will appear in the game and such because you cannot see such effects directly within maya.

with these kinds of real time effects available within the work environment of apps like maya and lw, we will be able to see and alter much more effects inside our 3d apps and reduce the back and forth that is sometimes required.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

having said all that, there is one potential for which hardware accelerated rendering could help for non gaming purposes:

if you use hardware acceleration to perform effects that WON'T be appropriate for games because it brings the frame rate to a crawl (let's say 5 fps - a good frame rate for pc and required for consoles is 60 fps) but it looks super good.

in this gray zone, it's possible to achieve effects that are good enough for film/tv work and renders much much faster (potentially dumping out frames at 5 fps!).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

so,

considering all that, i think you guys aren't missing out on as much as you may think.

but it would still behoove us to have it.

i've thought for a long time now that newtek needs to do some smart BLACK BOXING of the real time renderer interface used in modeler and lightwave.

nowadays, OPENGL and DX is moving so fast, that they can't afford to have a locked in, hard coded renderer that is so enmeshed that it's difficult to swap out.

we need it to be almost like a cartridge. we can just drop new renderers in and out like a plugin.

come on newtek. get hip to the program cats. cuz we're groovin'.

jin

DaveW
06-17-2003, 11:29 PM
Arnie, your point is certainly valid if you're mixing hardware and software rendering like Maya does for particles. But if everything is rendered in hardware like the new Maya and XSI renderers, you just buy rendernodes that have fast video cards instead of fast CPU's. You'd still need a modern CPU of course, and the machines might cost a little more, but you gain tremendous speed, and as we all know time is money. Obviously the technology hasn't quite reached the point where it's suitable for photorealisitc VFX, but just about every other market can take advantage of it. It gives a lot of power to independent/low-budget artists who can't afford a renderfarm and would rather wait a week instead of 6 months to render their animations.

jin choung
06-17-2003, 11:37 PM
as for the HW thing for maya,

yah, a lot of their particle effects are HW and you don't have a SW option so that could be pretty bad if you got a huge render res and require pricey graphics cards.

all the fire particle effects in lord of the ring's balrog were done in maya with the HW renderer.

BUT

1. this isn't necessarily the path that XSI is pursuing. it is probably meant to appeal most to game developers and primarily meant to be able to see game shading effects in xsi proper.

2. most gaming vid cards (which support DX9/OPENGL new rev pixel/vertex shader fx) come with 128MB of ram STANDARD! another hundred gets you 256MB!

3. it should be possible through the agp bus to shuttle renders in progress back and forth to system ram and even to page file if necessary. if maya doesn't do it now, it's probably a matter of choice and not of technical gap. if xsi wants to do differently, they probably CAN.

jin

DaveW
06-17-2003, 11:55 PM
Originally posted by jin choung
first, what this is NOT is a means of using video card hardware to do F9 or non real time renders.

XSI may include some functionality to record the real-time playback but this is not essentially a NON GAME DEVELOPER tool.

this is PRIMARILY AN ISSUE OF JUST SEEING LOTS OF NEATO EFFECTS in your INTERFACE WINDOW!

unless you want your stuff to look like game footage (and as good as it is right now, it's not quite jurassic park yet), it's not gonna help much in your production if you're not in games.



That may be true of XSI's current implementation (I haven't looked into it yet) but Maya's hardware renderer *is* meant to use the video card for F9/F10 renders. Obviously not for film fx, but a lot of people can get away without that kind of quality. It doesn't have to look like games at all. You can use models, textures, and pixel/vertex shaders that would be far too slow to use in a game but still render 100x faster than a software renderer. A render speed improvement where we start measuring in frames-per-second instead of seconds-per-frame is a big deal.





considering all that, i think you guys aren't missing out on as much as you may think.


I disagree, I think that if NewTek doesn't get started on this (if they haven't already) then we're missing out on a lot. Right now I'm working on a project that is taking about 30 seconds per frame to render, but if it were using a hardware renderer it could easily be rendered faster than realtime.

jin choung
06-18-2003, 12:03 AM
with all my statements in their context, i agree with you completely dave.

jin

Exper
06-18-2003, 01:41 AM
RIGHT DaveW...
it's really sad in seeing how much LW5.6 was innovative: RenderGL;
and now...
when the RenderGL stuff is mature and usefull NT doesn't re-implement it...
and we must listen about Alias and Avid playing with their brass bands about a feature which we could have for years by now...
sad, really sad! :(

Come on NT... come on... you must return to be an innovative company. ;)

Bye.

jin choung
06-18-2003, 02:08 AM
"Come on NT... come on... you must return to be an innovative company."

you can't just say that you know....

cuz it's easy to say. squeezing blood from a rock hard to implement.

money.

moolah.

dinero.

scratch.

aye... there's the rub.

aye....

jin

Exper
06-18-2003, 04:02 AM
Originally posted by jin choung
you can't just say that you know....I can't just say...
hoping this one is true:
DCC applications and tools vendors, like Right Hemisphere’s Deep Exploration product, Alias|Wavefront Maya, Discreet 3ds max, SOFTIMAGE|XSI and NewTek LightWave 3D, are embedding Cg into the digital artist’s workflow.
(read: http://tw.nvidia.com/view.asp?IO=Cg_FAQ_CHT)

;)

Bye.

Castius
06-18-2003, 07:38 AM
It's plain and simple the more you can see in real time the less time it takes to produce the effect you are looking for. layered textures, procedurals, transparencys, and eventually shadows. These can all help so if there is possibilty of adding them i'd like to see it happen. No matter what kind of work you are trying to produce speed it always important.

jin choung
06-18-2003, 11:27 AM
yah,

but the techniques used to draw the fx in real time may not be the ones that you use to d f9 renders....

cg shader fx are meant for real time.... not sure how they will translate into f9 renders and what that would entail to make it so.... it would be a renderman equivalent if possible and if the quality is equivalent.....

jin

Elmar Moelzer
06-18-2003, 11:53 AM
This is why I wanted this as a separate rendermode, liek quickshade is. It is good for previews and gamedev- stuff, but I would not want to use it for a final high- quality- render.
Maybe for small not so well payed projects it might be an option though. I would certainly not recommend starting to mix that up, even if MAYA does it (not everything MAYA does is good).
And considering the differences the output of Grakas has nowadays I think this would mean that all GPUs in your renderfarm have to be the same...
CU
Elmar

Exper
06-18-2003, 11:59 AM
RenderGL... do you remember LW5.6??? ;)

A little off-topic thing:
why they close "Will LightWave [8] have renderer improvements..." Thread?

Bye.

harhar
06-18-2003, 04:19 PM
They feel insecurity.

Bytehawk
06-18-2003, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by Exper
A little off-topic thing:
why they close "Will LightWave [8] have renderer improvements..." Thread?



someone mentioned the "L" word ?

CB_3D
06-20-2003, 03:29 AM
probably been posted before, but it´s impressive enough to take a second look :-)

http://www.cgshaders.org/shaders

awesome. i like the cartoon shading most. wahhhh, interactive mangas in Layout, hehe.

Exper
06-20-2003, 04:11 AM
About Cg:
Cg also comes with a suite of complementary tools, including plug-ins for artists (Maya 4.5, 3ds max 5, XSI 3.0), DirectX and OpenGL runtimes, comprehensive documentation and hundreds of shader examples.
http://developer.nvidia.com/view.asp?PAGE=cg_main

But here, as prevously reported:
DCC applications and tools vendors, like Right Hemisphere’s Deep Exploration product, Alias|Wavefront Maya, Discreet 3ds max, SOFTIMAGE|XSI and NewTek LightWave 3D, are embedding Cg into the digital artist’s workflow.
http://tw.nvidia.com/view.asp?IO=Cg_FAQ_CHT

Can NT/Luxology provide us some kind of information about it?

Bye.

Joe
06-20-2003, 11:20 AM
Real time rendering has been available in XSI since 2.0 through the CG shaders. What changed in 3.5 is the option to choose the between software rendering and hardware rendering when doing the equivalent of LW's F9

this movie here was done in 2.0 rendered in realtime OGL
http://www.inframez.com/3d_pixar.htm