View Poll Results: Cycles for LightWave ?

Voters
36. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    30 83.33%
  • No

    2 5.56%
  • Maybe

    4 11.11%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 44

Thread: Cycles for LightWave

  1. #16

    yup   so i added an "if" above. had too.  
    LW vidz   DPont donate   LightWiki   RHiggit   IKBooster   My vidz

  2. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by prometheus View Post
    So...You purchased it? just curious in such case to why..isnīt eCycles supposed to be implemented in future blender versions? and if you say it is that expensive, it will probably not be of interest for me.

    Good info though, but how does it handle volumetrics?
    Just like cycles only faster.

  3. #18
    Registered User Rayek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,529
    Quote Originally Posted by prometheus View Post
    So...You purchased it? just curious in such case to why..isnīt eCycles supposed to be implemented in future blender versions? and if you say it is that expensive, it will probably not be of interest for me.

    Good info though, but how does it handle volumetrics?
    I needed a speedup for my rendering. I thought about updating my ancient 11 year old machine this Christmas, but I have a stable working system now, and in the middle of several jobs and projects, and I have a gut feeling I should wait a month or six for the AMD ThreadRipper CPUs to become more readily available. Vendors are asking ridiculous prices right now due to limited availability. Things need to stabilize more...

    eCycles was on sale, so I jumped in. It really is amazing. Same scenes, FAR faster rendering.

    Since I don't do a lot of volumetric rendering, feel free to send a link of a test scene of yours to me, and I will render it in official Blender 2.81 and eCycles 2.81 for you to compare.

    The RTX version of eCycles is supposed to be even faster, but I can't test that. Purchasing a 2070 or 80 for an old i7 920 system seems a waste ;-)

    Anyway, with eCycles it's as if I just got a machine that renders 2 up to 5 times faster. My machine is no longer tied up with longer rendering times anymore, and it allows me to work faster.
    Win10 64 - i7 [email protected], p6t Deluxe v1, 48gb, Nvidia GTX 1080 8GB, Revodrive X2 240gb, e-mu 1820. Screens: 2 x Samsung s27a850ds 2560x1440, HP 1920x1200 in portrait mode

  4. #19
    RETROGRADER prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    sweden stockholm
    Posts
    16,156
    Quote Originally Posted by Rayek View Post
    I needed a speedup for my rendering. I thought about updating my ancient 11 year old machine this Christmas, but I have a stable working system now, and in the middle of several jobs and projects, and I have a gut feeling I should wait a month or six for the AMD ThreadRipper CPUs to become more readily available. Vendors are asking ridiculous prices right now due to limited availability. Things need to stabilize more...

    eCycles was on sale, so I jumped in. It really is amazing. Same scenes, FAR faster rendering.

    Since I don't do a lot of volumetric rendering, feel free to send a link of a test scene of yours to me, and I will render it in official Blender 2.81 and eCycles 2.81 for you to compare.

    The RTX version of eCycles is supposed to be even faster, but I can't test that. Purchasing a 2070 or 80 for an old i7 920 system seems a waste ;-)

    Anyway, with eCycles it's as if I just got a machine that renders 2 up to 5 times faster. My machine is no longer tied up with longer rendering times anymore, and it allows me to work faster.

    Great info, and ok..I understand better why you had the urge to jump in to it know.

    As for providing a volumetric sample, maybe..I have to check, mainly it will be VDB cloud cache files..and mainly simulated from blender...but I may have to wait til blender 2.82
    Maybe also a tank explosion scene...


  5. #20
    You know, ecycles is on sale right now at half off?
    After reading about it, it was worth the gift to me.
    I don't have the new Octane, still on 4.x. As I have been bandying things back and forth, the speed is astounding on my old Titan.
    Hoping to find a tute that gets me an Octane-look: love their atmosphere.
    Robert

  6. #21
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    a place
    Posts
    2,059
    81% think the lw render engine sucks

  7. #22

    it doesn't suck, it is just slow.  

    Last edited by erikals; 12-28-2019 at 06:24 AM.
    LW vidz   DPont donate   LightWiki   RHiggit   IKBooster   My vidz

  8. #23
    RETROGRADER prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    sweden stockholm
    Posts
    16,156
    Quote Originally Posted by erikals View Post
    it doesn't suck, it is just slow.  

    True.

    Volumetrics is more realistic, as are surfaces and lighting..
    - for the way how glossy surfaces produces spots, and the speed of the rendering...Especially fiberfx.
    Some minor drawbacks loosing out on shaders, but many can be replaced by working on the pbr materials itself.

    If I compare indirect lighting in a volume VS blender cycles, it seems to be easier to control the bouncing and getting effect per amount of rays bounced, and fast..but in lightwave increasing rays doesnīt seem to yield much of effect, seem you have to compensate and increase indirect intensity to make it more appearant.
    You activated affected by volumetrics, engage indirect samples..but just increasing the amount of rays in either radiosity itself or indirect sampling doesnīt do much compared to volume bounces in cycles.

    I also prefer blenders pbr subsurface VS Lightwaves, seems easier to get the skin effect I want..especially that bleeding through when a light is back behind lighting an ear.
    Then again...the skin reflection and eye reflection with area lights in Lightwave I really prefer that before blenders..which can be a little tricky to set up when it comes to good eye reflection, ISBG Sampling is almost a must to get that going on in the eye.

    And to note, In Ligghtwave we do have a lot of more interesting Lights than in blender cycles, cycles on the other hand has a much better way of dealing with emissive materials making it glow or spread lights..much better than in Lightwave.

    Some proīs and conīs in both.

  9. #24
    Frequenter
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Munich
    Posts
    425
    Actually, I do like LWīs new render engine a lot - and I do not necessarily find it slow, for a CPU based renderer - it is just that Iīd love to have it taking full advantage of GPUīs also! Is that too much to wish for? ;-]
    Last edited by fishhead; 12-28-2019 at 10:31 AM.
    ______________
    lorenz

  10. #25
    The LW engine is to be loved. The LW engine with a gpu option is, as well, to drivel over.

    Today is my favorite day because I'm here.

    Whether I love it or not, it doesn't make it great when my patience is the gauge.

    The Octane engine taught me about nodes and the future of nodes. Nodes made it pretty. Nodes could make things move and go.

    Now...
    I am old, impatient and knowledgeable and resourced. If I can find faster, I want that, especially on the bottleneck of getting my ideas out: rendering.
    Brushing up on Chinese and my French, this is my repose, 3D, and I must say these are best of times.

  11. #26
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Right here
    Posts
    1,735
    Quote Originally Posted by erikals View Post
    - it is cheap
    - yes, it is implemented into a future Blender version

    so if we get Cycles for LightWave, it should be there (here) too.  
    Can you please list sources that eCycles will be implemented in Blender?

    Cycles in LW I don't see that happen. I know there are some development efforts buy a guy but that doesn't look convincing me at all. I use Cycles4D since beginning I have an idea much development a good integration means. And why do you think automatically eCycles should be there too in this LW bridge jst be caused it would be part of Blender?

  12. #27
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Right here
    Posts
    1,735
    Quote Originally Posted by Rayek View Post
    Today I finally bit the bullet, and got eCycles.

    And holy ****, I can't believe the speed-up! Mike Pan's BMW scene takes 1 minute and 30 seconds to render in Blender 2.81 on my GTX1080. ECycles renders it in 40 seconds.

    The Barcelona Pavilion outdoor scene takes around 30 minutes (I did not wait for it to finish). Now it takes 8 minutes and 16 seconds. Wot!

    The speed upgrade is unbelievable. I could not believe it at first.

    The only disadvantage is that this is a rather expensive investment comparable to getting a license of Vray, or Octane.

    If you own a RTX card, the render speed increase should be even more pronounced.
    Huh? As expensive as Vray or Octane? Investment? My Vray license was about $850 and for eCycles I paid $49...

  13. #28
    Electron wrangler jwiede's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    6,769
    Quote Originally Posted by gar26lw View Post
    81% think the lw render engine sucks
    Cite please?
    John W.
    LW2015.3UB/2019.1.4 on MacPro(12C/24T/10.13.6),64GB RAM, NV 980ti

  14. #29

    Can you please list sources that eCycles will be implemented in Blender?
    sorry, couldn't find link, but it was stated from the author of eCycles.

    81% think the lw render engine sucks
    Cite please?
    it doesn't, but it needs a speedup.  
    LW vidz   DPont donate   LightWiki   RHiggit   IKBooster   My vidz

  15. #30
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Right here
    Posts
    1,735
    Quote Originally Posted by erikals View Post

    sorry, couldn't find link, but it was stated from the author of eCycles.
    Ok thanks anyway.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •