PDA

View Full Version : Landscapes - potential LW user



bkr
01-27-2008, 10:09 PM
greetings,

i'd like to find out if LW is the right program for me.

i currently own lightwave 6.5 and 7.5 from years ago, and ended up without much of a chance to explore the program much until now. i'm still eligible for the upgrade price for the latest version, so this would be a matter of upgrading vs. full version.

using LW for me would be a fun yet serious hobby that will hopefully lead to more in the future. i would be learning via books and tutorials.

the bottom line is:
i'm looking to create stunning landscapes with futuristic elements along with steam, clouds, waterfalls, lakes, streams, sun, rays of light, etc. i don't mind a learning curve, i'm patient and driven on top of the fact i think i'd really enjoy the challenge. I'd be focused on print for the time being.

is this possible by only using LW? or would i need other plugins / programs to make this happen.

thanks for your time!

Surrealist.
01-27-2008, 11:05 PM
Apparently Vue is a good companion for landscape stuff especially futuristic stuff, though I have not used it. Take a look at their site (http://www.e-onsoftware.com/). I think you would be happy with an upgrade to Version 9 LW and something like Vue as a compliment.

dccpro
01-27-2008, 11:46 PM
Look at hd instance as well. Its a plugin for LW.

kopperdrake
01-28-2008, 04:06 AM
Aye - Vue would do the stuff you mention but unless you have a beefy setup it'll take a while to render especially if you want to animate anything. It's modelling's not great either - so you could use LW to model and import to view. Best setup if budget allowed would be as previous suggestions - upgrade LW - there's some great and useful radiosity speed increases, and get a copy of Vue Xstream which seamlessly integrates into LightWave as a plugin - Xstream renders the Xstream landscape and skies etc, LW renders its objects, all in one image. And HD Instance is a great plugin for generating loads of instances.

Hmm - I've never tried using all three at once!

Phil
01-28-2008, 04:20 AM
I'd suggest Vue, but it isn't what you would call a fast rendering system.

For still work, if you can tolerate a lengthy render, it should be OK. I've not played with it as much as I expected because rendering times for non-flickery animation are appalling, and there are several nasty bugs in the program (including hotkey support being shaky). e-on's support is also entirely worthless (no direct email, stupid webform, and no actually useful response), so don't expect to get much help from them.

There's a personal learning edition of Vue available from the developer, so it's probably a good idea to take a look and see what it can do (http://www.e-onsoftware.com/products/). Compare and contrast your requirements and options via http://www.e-onsoftware.com/products/?page=4

If you end up preferring LightWave, but want the skies, etc. from Vue, there is also the Ozone 3 plugin, although it only appears to support LightWave 9 and upwards (http://www.e-onsoftware.com/products/ozone/ozone_3.0/?page=3). Like Vue, there's a personal learning edition available and it might be possible to use the demo version of LW 9 (via NewTek Europe) in combination with the PLE version of Ozone 3 to figure out what you want to do.
HDInstance will also be a requirement if you want to do everything in LW (for foliage, etc. No demo available), and at that point you need to sit down and work out what the cheapest option might be.

rakker16mm
01-28-2008, 02:45 PM
I'm in more of less the same boat with needing to create landscapes, although for my current project they don't have to be stunning, just believable. I've been using 8.5 for about a year and I love the modeling, but when it comes time to populate my scene with plants and other natural items it takes far more time and effort than I spend on the modeling.

At first I considered buying plugins to add more capability to LW, but after trying the PLE of Vue 6 Xstream I knew I wanted it on it's own merits anyway. Plus it's always so nice to have a new app. So I'm going with Vue Xstream + LW 9 which I hope will be here by the end of the week :thumbsup:

dccpro
01-28-2008, 02:52 PM
vue is junk in my opinion! I would have gone with LW and HD instence!
Look at this (http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=78338)

bkr
01-28-2008, 03:27 PM
holy cow!

thanks for all of your wonderful input!!

i'm going to download some trials of Vue and check it out. i need to chew on what everyone wrote and take it in to consideration... being that you all seem to know exactly what you're talking about. :)

about my computer rig in a nutshell i have a Mac Pro 2 x 2.66 GHz dual-core intel xeon, 2GB 667 MHz DDR2 ram, ATI Radeon x1900 with 512MB ram, 23" apple cinema hd display, along with plenty of hard drive space (2 TB +)

i can't tell you how happy i am so many have replied with your knowledge and insight, time to chew on it for a while!

you all rock!

Giacomo99
01-28-2008, 03:50 PM
Just to add my two cents: Vue is not much fun to use. I've been trying to learn it for over a year (I got it free with the last LW upgrade) and I can't say I've had much luck getting beyond the presets. As others have noted, the documentation and support are really awful too.

rakker16mm
01-28-2008, 04:47 PM
Is really Vue junk? I suggest any one who needs to do landscapes download the PLE version and judge for themselves. For me the UI is very easy to understand and I find I am getting great results with very little time and effort. That leaves me more time for modeling and animating our client's models! The huge plus here is, our client thinks we put in all that extra effort to make the coconut palms get thrashed in the hurricane. May be my standards are too low, but Vue was used in Pirates of the Caribbean Dead man's Chest, and I think if it can do that it will suffice for my purposes.

I'm not discounting HD instence at all. In fact I think it is a great tool and I will probably will purchase it in the near future. Unfortunately it does not do everything that Vue Xstream does. So I don't think it is fair to consider it to be a stand in for Vue. It is a plugin not a stand alone application.

I need animated weather, animated oceans, animated plants, etc etc etc. Can HD instence do all that? I know that I can make LW do many of those things, with a lot more time and effort, but our company consists of exactly two people and there is only one person to do all the CG, and that's me.

jaf
01-28-2008, 06:00 PM
I would take a look at Terragen 2. It hasn't been released yet (they have a pre-release pricing package.) I think this software is the closest to photo-real. I'm not sure how easy it is to use.

Take a look at some of the scenes created in TG2: http://www.planetside.co.uk/gallery/f/tg2

As mentioned, you still need a good modeling program to add structures etc, to the scene.

bkr
01-28-2008, 06:16 PM
as for Terragen, i've been using version 0.9 and honestly i didn't know about version 2 since i haven't used the program in a while, i'll have to check it out!

would it be safe to say that Swish is to Adobe Flash as Vue is to LightWave?

i've started downloading Vue 6 PLE, i'll have to report back!

keep it coming!

rakker16mm
01-28-2008, 07:08 PM
I would take a look at Terragen 2. It hasn't been released yet (they have a pre-release pricing package.) I think this software is the closest to photo-real. I'm not sure how easy it is to use.

Take a look at some of the scenes created in TG2: http://www.planetside.co.uk/gallery/f/tg2

As mentioned, you still need a good modeling program to add structures etc, to the scene.

They have a free preview you can download for noncommercial use.

zapper1998
01-28-2008, 07:29 PM
They need to upgrade the GUI in Vue,

It's so Old, like the Bryce Program..

It really needs a professional face lift bad...IMHO

mikadit
01-28-2008, 08:07 PM
HDInstance will also be a requirement if you want to do everything in LW (for foliage, etc. No demo available)
There is a demo of HD Instance 1.1 :
http://www.happy-digital.com/instance_demo.asp ;)

rakker16mm
01-28-2008, 08:10 PM
would it be safe to say that Swish is to Adobe Flash as Vue is to LightWave?


I don't use Adobe Flash and I've never heard of Swish, so I really can't answer your question, but after you play with the PLE version for a while you will know if it is the right program for you.

One thing I am in agreement with others is that e-on's documentation is a bit on the thin side, but as I said earlier their UI is fairly intuitive especially in comparison to Lightwave, and LightWave is fairly straightforward.

If you decide to get one of the lower end versions of Vue, you should think about getting the plugin for importing LWO. I went with Exstream because it doesn't limit your animation resolution to 1600 pixels wide, and I wanted to have as many options available for importing and exporting assets.

rakker16mm
01-28-2008, 08:33 PM
They need to upgrade the GUI in Vue,

It's so Old, like the Bryce Program..

It really needs a professional face lift bad...IMHO

I have the PLE version running side by side with Bryce, and I can't see any similarity between those two apps at all. :screwy:

Functionally Vue is light years ahead of Bryce. Cosmetically Bryce and Vue both look a lot nicer than lightwave, but lightwave gives you the most options for customizing the interface.

Phil
01-29-2008, 01:10 AM
There is a demo of HD Instance 1.1 :
http://www.happy-digital.com/instance_demo.asp ;)

Well blow me down. Win32 only by the looks of it, but still it's good to know that a demo is available.

fyffe
01-29-2008, 05:32 PM
Oh, looks like I'm going to have to update that demo :) It's getting kind of stale.

eyelandarts
01-29-2008, 05:44 PM
Vue does look great if you know how to use it but I find it much too unstable and akward to work with. I found the Hd-instance and LW combo to be much more powerfull and versatile.

zapper1998
01-29-2008, 06:05 PM
I have the PLE version running side by side with Bryce, and I can't see any similarity between those two apps at all. :screwy:

Functionally Vue is light years ahead of Bryce. Cosmetically Bryce and Vue both look a lot nicer than lightwave, but lightwave gives you the most options for customizing the interface.

What I meant was, that the GUI's for both programs are so OLD, and OUTDATED, they need to MODERNIZE there GUI's

Ya Think...:screwy: :screwy:

Michael

bkr
01-30-2008, 11:56 AM
i've been digesting all of the posts and have a few more specific questions :D ... because you all rock... and i'm all about rockin'!

right now i'd have to choose one program over the other (aside from potential plugins), so here's a breakdown of what i THINK i'm looking at for my needs:

VUE 6 Pro Studio or VUE 6 Infinite:
- i'd use this as a stand-alone
- seems to be good software for what i'd like to do most (landscapes / seascapes)
- big learning curve (hardly any experience with 3d apps)
- not well supported
- small community
- tutorials? books? documentation?? arrg!
- slow render times
- instability? i've only done a basic test render and crashed twice, in the forums i've read about more people having the same issue.
- large resolution renders? i've been reading problems about this here (http://www.cornucopia3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5950&sid=63dc9b99dfa076f7987ef251ed922fcd)
- absolutely no possibility of modeling detailed objects when i'm at the ceiling of the program and want to explore more.

LightWave:
- i'd use this as a stand-alone with plugins as i learn more
- seems to be good software for what i'd like to do most (landscapes / seascapes) ... along with everything else i'm interested in trying in the future
- huge learning curve (hardly any experience with 3d apps)
- EXTREMELY well supported (the proof is you're reading this!)
- HUGE community
- tutorials! books! documentation!! wohooo!
- fast render times (i keep hearing LW is phenomenal)
- stable, from what i've read.
- large resolution renders? i don't recall reading any system or memory issues (please advise)
- absolutely every possibility of modeling detailed objects when i'm at the ceiling of the program and want to explore more.

so from what i can tell by research and playing with VUE a little (as the LW demo is down for program updates) it seems that LW along with HD_Instance would be the best way to go, and if i can't find a way to make sky's with big fluffy clouds and all that jazz there's Ozone 3.

the plan would be to start out with LW and no plugins, dedicate time to learn learn learn then as i feel the need to expand and create my ideal landscapes for print i'd look in to getting the two plugins mentioned above...

the thing i'm wondering the most is if LightWave is the kind of program i can pickup and learn on my own and actually be good enough over a few months to have respectable output, any thoughts on this? (i do learn complicated things quickly)

rakker16mm
01-30-2008, 12:29 PM
the thing i'm wondering the most is if LightWave is the kind of program i can pickup and learn on my own and actually be good enough over a few months to have respectable output, any thoughts on this? (i do learn complicated things quickly)

Fortunately you don't have to. There are tons of resources on the internet. That's one of the great things about using LightWave.

William Vaughan's Video tutorials are great, and when ever you get stuck or stumped just post a question and some one will probably be able to answer it.

Free Lightwave Training (http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=77002)

Phil
01-30-2008, 12:43 PM
LightWave:
- fast render times (i keep hearing LW is phenomenal)

It's reasonably fast.


- stable, from what i've read.

It's reasonably stable, but is not perfect.


- large resolution renders? i don't recall reading any system or memory issues (please advise)

LW is currently fairly memory hungry when rendering and high resolution renders present problems. There is a workaround, with some limitations, in VirtualRender (a 3rd party plugin). Otherwise you have to be a little creative.


so from what i can tell by research and playing with VUE a little (as the LW demo is down for program updates) it seems that LW along with HD_Instance would be the best way to go, and if i can't find a way to make sky's with big fluffy clouds and all that jazz there's Ozone 3.

There is an LW demo available. NewTek US just seems to be extremely slow off the mark - follow the NewTek Europe link in my signature and you'll have a demo of the current version in less time than it takes to make a cup of tea :)

If you are content to go down the plugin route, you might want to look at NatureFX from Dynamic Realities. The risk here is that it seems to be somewhat less than maintained - the company hasn't updated their web site in ages. They tell me it works with 9.x, but I've no direct experience with any of their plugins.


the thing i'm wondering the most is if LightWave is the kind of program i can pickup and learn on my own and actually be good enough over a few months to have respectable output, any thoughts on this? (i do learn complicated things quickly)

The learning curve is eased a lot by the text menus. The most important thing you can do is also to use the Production Studio Style menus in both applications (head for the 'edit menu' command when you have the demo and select the style from the presets drop down menu in the menu editor). You'll find that the whole package then makes a lot more sense.

bkr
01-30-2008, 02:24 PM
i'm excited!

as it turned out for the LW trial software on the US side the page says it's down for program updates, the EU side says to register to NewTek and look under your profile and click 'My Downloads'... so i did that.

LW 9.3.1 trial is only 35.6MB? wow, well i'm going to install it and see what happens, i also snagged all the bonus content and made bookmarks to all sorts of tutorials and their project content.

i'd really like to see some 100% lightwave renders of landscapes with water and fluffy clouds as examples hehe :hey:

off to install and explore! /cheer!

bkr
01-30-2008, 06:11 PM
greetings again!

in the trial version of LW it's showing as a 32 bit app, is the full version 64 bit for mac?

bkr
01-30-2008, 09:43 PM
i made dice!!!

i think i'll continue to check out the LW trial and go through as many tutorials as i can.

thanks again for everyone's help!

must render, must render... :lwicon:

Phil
01-31-2008, 12:15 AM
There is no 64-bit version for Mac right now. The main reason is that LW is not written for Cocoa, but using Carbon, and the only way to deliver a 64 bit application like LW on Leopard is to have it implemented within the Cocoa framework.

I suspect NewTek is working on it, but it is not clear when this will appear.

rakker16mm
01-31-2008, 03:48 AM
There is no 64-bit version for Mac right now. The main reason is that LW is not written for Cocoa, but using Carbon, and the only way to deliver a 64 bit application like LW on Leopard is to have it implemented within the Cocoa framework.

I suspect NewTek is working on it, but it is not clear when this will appear.

I just hope when the 64-bit version comes out it will be in UB :thumbsup: for the sake of my dear ol' G5 :D

starbase1
01-31-2008, 06:41 AM
In my opinion neither is ideal.

I pretty much gave up on LW for landscapes in general, the main problems are:

Very limited polycount.
Sky system is contemptibly bad.
No veg system at all.

For me the main plus is that it's a delight to use, and has higher quality renders for what it can do.

Vue has superb skies built in, loads of presets, a vegetation system that works very nicely, (at least for the higher end versions).

Main drawback are an interface from hell, and no effective modeling capability. Vegetation is mostly a paid for extra, and getting a decent selection is not cheap. Importing is extensive in terms of formats supported, but the surfaces generally need LOTS of fixing. I have not had serious instabilities with Vue or LW.

In terms of polygon specifics, on the same PC my LW gets painful at about 1.5 million polygons. On Vue I have managed 6 billion, and that gives it a BIG edge.

I'd suggest you could get a lot from even one of the less capable / cheaper Vue versions in conjunction with LW - it is very straightforward to export a sky as an image you can use as an environment map in LW, (including HDRI options).

colkai
01-31-2008, 07:10 AM
That's the beauty of having Vue5I, courtesy of Newtek. :)
Being able to sort out an environment, then drop it in.
Even with 5I, you can get some nice results.

Andyjaggy
01-31-2008, 09:25 AM
I can recommend Vue, as long as you don't want to do animations its great.

Dionysios
01-31-2008, 10:39 AM
You may also want to look at a new plugin to help with landscape creation, it's called Sumatra. It's not really designed to be a competitor to HD instance (I don't think you can use trillions of polygons), but it gives some nice options, like easy control of level of detail, random generation of objects (i.e. plants, rocks, etc.), and control via weightmaps. Check out the website at http://lwtoolbox.com

wp_capozzi
01-31-2008, 12:14 PM
I've been using Vue5I with good results. HDInstance too. The technique I've been working with starts with a DEM rendered out of Vue as a large panoramic still image, then I use that as a texture background in LW. I also add pre-rendered still panoramic scape images to globe objects for a multi layered effect. It has it's limits when animating, but works well if you plan it all out. I'm able to get wide vistas full of vegetation that render fairly fast (compared to brute force rendering a full Vue scene). Adding more Vue trees and a healthy dose of HDInstance items in the foreground spice it up quite well. Biggest drawback so far is the limit of resolution that my system can handle.

-Bill C.

rakker16mm
01-31-2008, 01:12 PM
I can recommend Vue, as long as you don't want to do animations its great.

If you mean character animation I would definitely agree it isn't the best choice, but if you want to have an animated environment for your animated character to run around in I think it does some pretty cool stuff. That's why I think it is a great program when it is used in concert with other software such as LightWave.

Andyjaggy
01-31-2008, 01:37 PM
No it has nothing to do with that. It has to do with rendering time. Insane AA required to get rid of flickering. Picky and flaky buffers. And a network renderer that is determined to crash at the end of every render. Just too name a few.

rakker16mm
01-31-2008, 03:54 PM
I think AA slows down any render. My LW animations can also approach glacial time periods when I have AA on. Considering how many overlapping poly are in present in a large scene issues with buffers and flickering are not a surprise. I have heard that was especially the case with Vue 5. What software would you go with over Vue? I haven't scene anything in my budget that will do all the different things Vue can.

HD Instence can dot the scene with trees and rocks. I could also get Sumatra which looks like it might be a good tool. Real flow can do my storm surge animations, and Blender which is free can do some good work if you have the time. There are plugins for skies even one from e-on, and I have Citygen, but by the time I finish paying for all of those plugins I may as well have bought Vue. Besides my experience with plugins is that some of them can be very flakey as well.

Andyjaggy
01-31-2008, 04:11 PM
I think AA slows down any render. My LW animations can also approach glacial time periods when I have AA on. Considering how many overlapping poly are in present in a large scene issues with buffers and flickering are not a surprise. I have heard that was especially the case with Vue 5. What software would you go with over Vue? I haven't scene anything in my budget that will do all the different things Vue can.

HD Instence can dot the scene with trees and rocks. I could also get Sumatra which looks like it might be a good tool. Real flow can do my storm surge animations, and Blender which is free can do some good work if you have the time. There are plugins for skies even one from e-on, and I have Citygen, but by the time I finish paying for all of those plugins I may as well have bought Vue. Besides my experience with plugins is that some of them can be very flakey as well.

That's just the thing, Vue is the best option at the moment. I don't think however you understand how bad the flickering in Vue is and what kind of rendering times I am talking here :) The scene I have been working on takes upwards of 8 hours a frame to totally get rid of flickering. And that's on an 8 core machine. I've never had to go anywhere near that crazy with a LW render, from what I have heard vegetation with HD instance doesn't have that much of a problem with flickering.

It is understandable though, that kind of massive vegetation would of coarse be expected to take a rather long time to render. Luckily for the folks at E-On when you do finally iron out all the kinks in their buggy software you can get some fantastic and gorgeous results.

Then don't even get me started on the Xstream plugin. Pretty much useless for doing anything serious. After a month of R&D I finally resorted to just using the old camera and light sync plugins that came with Vue 5.

rakker16mm
01-31-2008, 04:48 PM
When I mentioned to a friend that I was looking for a computationally cheap method for rendering skies and landscapes he immediately responded by saying "Don't compromise - Cheating is much better" :D

I don't have ILM's resources so I am planning around the limitations of my pipeline. So it's basically a lot of Matte shots, Forced perspective and compositing.

Andyjaggy
01-31-2008, 05:43 PM
Your friend is probably right. There are some cheats out there that give great results and don't have near the problems or render power needs that using something like Vue has. Unfortunately my knowledge of those cheats is pretty limited, and I have the rendering power at the moment so I've been giving Vue a shot. It's been a pretty frustrating journey but I think I am finally to the point where I have most of the bugs worked out. It's definitely a love hate relationship with Vue.

I'm hooked on the ability Vue gives me though to plant vegetation throughout and entire scene and then be able to go anywhere in that scene as close as you want to anything and have it look great, and be completely true 3D. It really is pretty amazing and awesome.

rakker16mm
01-31-2008, 07:53 PM
:agree: I guess it would be fair to say the only thing more frustrating than dealing with the imperfections of the software is not having it at all.

The story for project I am working on now originally called for fly in from satellite altitudes through Miami down the beach and then onto the deck of an aircraft carrier without any cuts. That would pretty much defeat most of my cheating techniques that I would like to save time with. Of course it can be done, but probably not within the budget.

In any case the finished shot would have been far too long to leave unedited, and once it was accepted that there were going to be edits the story of going from a Satellite > The city of Miami > Miami Beach > Aircraft Carrier, not only becomes possible, it becomes a lot more exiting, even though the individual shots that make up the story may not be as stunning as the fly through. Editing is the biggest, the best and the oldest cheat of them all.

Phil
02-01-2008, 01:09 AM
That's just the thing, Vue is the best option at the moment. I don't think however you understand how bad the flickering in Vue is and what kind of rendering times I am talking here :) The scene I have been working on takes upwards of 8 hours a frame to totally get rid of flickering. And that's on an 8 core machine. I've never had to go anywhere near that crazy with a LW render, from what I have heard vegetation with HD instance doesn't have that much of a problem with flickering.

Sounds about right to me. I regret having dropped cash on Vue 6 simply because I haven't been able to use it as I expected to. They boasted of faster render speeds, but it really hasn't been the case. I'm also not entirely convinced that Vue 6 runs faster on Intel Mac hardware than Vue 5 did under Rosetta.... Which is truly appalling.


It is understandable though, that kind of massive vegetation would of coarse be expected to take a rather long time to render. Luckily for the folks at E-On when you do finally iron out all the kinks in their buggy software you can get some fantastic and gorgeous results.

True, but it seems that they don't really have an intelligent approach to AA - it seems like they simply render the entire frame 'x' times and merge the results, rather than utilising adaptive sampling.

I've still not been able to render the example windmill scene in any kind of acceptable way, despite much fiddling with options.


Then don't even get me started on the Xstream plugin. Pretty much useless for doing anything serious. After a month of R&D I finally resorted to just using the old camera and light sync plugins that came with Vue 5.

That plugin was simply far too expensive for my tastes. It seems to go with the territory - Ozone 3 requires per-node licensing for the render farm as well, which is the first time I have encountered this with LW.

starbase1
02-01-2008, 01:30 AM
I think adaptive sampling is not a good idea for animation, you are pretty much always going to get some crawl.

In my experience it is true that Vue needs horrendous AA to animate, but I am wondering how much of this is due to the scene rather than the renderer. With distant overlapping vegetation you are going to have a huge range of colours within one pixel's area which will change a lot with a tiny camera move.

I suggest you can't expect to have distant high contrast detail in ANY renderer without this problem. Use a very limited palette for distant stuff.

Nick

rakker16mm
02-01-2008, 04:23 AM
I suggest you can't expect to have distant high contrast detail in ANY renderer without this problem. Use a very limited palette for distant stuff.

Nick

I agree. Besides too much detail in distant objects tends to make things look a bit flat, and this isn't just a problem with computer software. Back in the day when artist were painting matte shots for films the challenge was making something seem miles away when it was in reality just at the other end of the sound stage. I happened to see an interview of a veteran matte painter and his advice was basically that it was better not be too careful or it would look too painted. We are using different tools but we face some of the same challenges and pitfalls. I'm taking much of my inspiration from the old masters and am planing all my shots accordingly.

Andyjaggy
02-01-2008, 08:23 AM
Sounds about right to me. I regret having dropped cash on Vue 6 simply because I haven't been able to use it as I expected to. They boasted of faster render speeds, but it really hasn't been the case. I'm also not entirely convinced that Vue 6 runs faster on Intel Mac hardware than Vue 5 did under Rosetta.... Which is truly appalling.



True, but it seems that they don't really have an intelligent approach to AA - it seems like they simply render the entire frame 'x' times and merge the results, rather than utilising adaptive sampling.

I've still not been able to render the example windmill scene in any kind of acceptable way, despite much fiddling with options.



That plugin was simply far too expensive for my tastes. It seems to go with the territory - Ozone 3 requires per-node licensing for the render farm as well, which is the first time I have encountered this with LW.

Even if render times were the only issue I could look past that because of the awesome results, and the obvious challenges of rendering vegetation.

However this is not the only issue. Just getting the stuff rendered poses serious problems. I am saying this because I just came into work this morning to seem my render crashed at 6:30 last night.

Whoever programmed the lovely hypervue decided it was a good idea to not actually save the frames and buffers until ALL the frames have rendered. In otherwords a 6 day 450 frame render is now completely useless because hypervue just LOVES to crash upon completion of the render when it tries to save the files. Yes it does try to go back and recover them but without fail it crashes within 5 minutes.

So I think to myself I will set up batch renders of 10 frames at a time. I do that, it seems to be working I come in in the morning, and it has crashed trying to save frames 20-30.

After 6 months of fighting with this program it now appears that I may not even be able to render my scene!!!

And don't even get me started on E-On's licensing system. Someone needs to go slap them in the face to bring them back to reality.

starbase1
02-01-2008, 08:48 AM
And don't even get me started on E-On's licensing system. Someone needs to go slap them in the face to bring them back to reality.

Personally I agree completely. But I brought it up on the Vue forums, and it seems everyone there loved it! I also got the strong impression that many were promptly installing it on serveral machines, but putting up with the pain / cost when they upgradeed hardware.

Nick