Page 39 of 45 FirstFirst ... 293738394041 ... LastLast
Results 571 to 585 of 667

Thread: Lightwave 2020

  1. #571
    Almost newbie Cageman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Malmö, SWEDEN
    Posts
    7,718
    I'm one of those that do not want LW to become a GPU renderengine. However, I want LWs renderengine to become GPU accelerated.

    Two very different things.

    If you all take a moment an look around... CPUs had a fairly long time of stagnation. GPU renderengines came about.... with a fair share of limitations to boot, but a single GPU would be 8 times faster than a CPU. Fast forward...

    2020, AMD have, in my opinion, made a paradigm shift in CPU capabilites. And, compared to Intel, made them extremely lowcost. If AMD continues this thread of developement, LightWave or any other CPU-based renderengine will, slowly but certanly, remove the need of a GPU based renderengine.

    CPU rendering will, if AMD keeps up their work, become a fight between Realtime rendering and Offline rendering. This is where I see GPU render engines (Octane and Redshift with their share set of limitations) die. Because CPUs will be as fast as GPUs for Offline rendering.... initially at a much higher cost, but, without limitations... if AMD keep things up, the only thing GPUs will do better are realtime rendering.

    GPU rendering will be "demoted" to realtime tasks and CPU rendering will continue as usual, but way faster than before.
    Last edited by Cageman; 05-01-2020 at 03:02 PM.
    Senior Technical Supervisor
    Cinematics Department
    Massive - A Ubisoft Studio
    -----
    Intel Core i7-4790K @ 4GHz
    16GB Ram
    GeForce GTX 1080 8GB
    Windows 10 Pro x64

  2. #572
    Almost newbie Cageman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Malmö, SWEDEN
    Posts
    7,718
    Quote Originally Posted by prometheus View Post
    Oh..Geez michael, relax..
    Simple answer...

    If the manual says it will do something, why being an ashole about it? The reason I get upset is that you are second-guessing the developement team without a reason to do so.

    Stop doing that. If things doesn't work, true, but then bug-report it.

    You do come across as a very negative person regarding LW. I want to be possitive and constructive, because that, actually makes things change. Negativity doesn't.
    Senior Technical Supervisor
    Cinematics Department
    Massive - A Ubisoft Studio
    -----
    Intel Core i7-4790K @ 4GHz
    16GB Ram
    GeForce GTX 1080 8GB
    Windows 10 Pro x64

  3. #573
    RETROGRADER prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    sweden stockholm
    Posts
    16,786
    Quote Originally Posted by Cageman View Post
    Simple answer...

    If the manual says it will do something, why being an ashole about it? The reason I get upset is that you are second-guessing the developement team without a reason to do so.

    Stop doing that. If things doesn't work, true, but then bug-report it.

    You do come across as a very negative person regarding LW. I want to be possitive and constructive, because that, actually makes things change. Negativity doesn't.
    Keep things straight michael, in what way are my questions negative in regards to wether or not the particle advection will work, it isnīt ..itīs just about finding out wether or not it works or not, nothing in the manual says it does..and I can for the life of me not understand why you yourself hasnīt tried it ..when you did engage in the question in matter..obviously just by looking at the docs and finding out that there is a particle advection grid and velocity input/outputs.
    Does it say anywhere that it will work with the gas solver.

    And that is why I asked if you had tried it..since you engaged in it...and either you would be a great sport, and positive about it yourself and check it out, then get back to me...as I would if I had the time, I wouldnīt go about and become snarky with comments on not being your personal beta tester, either you help out or you say you donīt have time.

    As for negative..person, I am praising many sides of Lightwave ..particle advection I wasnīt clear on wether or not it works or not..and the latest release seem to be a dissapointment from my perspective...And I will speak up about it and why.
    You want to be positive..great, but donīt be blind to issues and critics about lightwave, itīs the old emperors cloths approach you just are adapting in such case.

    so no..I am not constantly negative regarding Lightwave..iveībeen upgrading from 2010-2019.1.5 but this time I most likely wonīt..I think they are not focusing in the right direction and development is taking too long time for some things to show up, that doesnīt mean that I will not check up on lightwave again..once they start to boost up the development.

    In the blender forums, I get attacked for being the foremost promoter of Lightwave, and here you are attacking me for being very negative in regards to lightwave..
    Please just drop your projections on to how much my level of criticism should be considered negatism or not..it doesnīt do anyone good either.

    Negatives doesnīt change a thing? common, that is silly..do you really think criticism has no value in describing issues that needs to be taken care of..thatīs nonsense.

    Have you not seen me going in here to help other lightwavers out with issues, or checking things...have you seen me call for..do it yourself and check it out, no...either I say I do not have the time to test or I test it...as you say, why being and a..hole about it?


    Where in the docs does it say particle advection can be made to push the particles with the help of the gas solver? itīs honestly not clear.
    Now you can read in to that..negativism, or me just wanting to find out..as I said before..currently I have other things as priority and installing before checking Lightwave 2020, and other things in this release that isnīt motivating me to upgrade anyway..so I asked for a little help of insight..but oh no.

    If anyone else finds it worthwile to be positive and not negative like Cageman regarding trying out Lightwave and give feedback, I would be grateful if someone tried the gas solver to push particles, if it works..I may get more motivated to install it sooner and try..but otherwise there are other tools pending first.

  4. #574
    RETROGRADER prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    sweden stockholm
    Posts
    16,786
    Quote Originally Posted by erikals View Post

    people will never go back, they will be previewing with ToneMapping in VPR. 
    Tone mapping is one of the few new features I liked.

  5. #575
    RETROGRADER prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    sweden stockholm
    Posts
    16,786
    And for being negative regarding Lightwave..
    some of my recent posts in blender forums..praising some things in lightwave, to balance up some things, though I have also said in there that my focus now will be more on blender...
    But some things are provoking for the blender forums..

    "Even though there are commercial flares for blender, I like to have it in native Lightwave working in VPR without having to pay for the plugin for such a “basic” thing…so lensflares is something I would want in basic blender, I do not want to pay for that really as a plugin when I have that in native lightwave.
    Then again I have to pay for the full Lightwave software.

    And this was over 8 years ago…and at that time I think it could have excelled to another level, but it didnīt due to the core spectacle and mismanagement and people leaving for starting new with Modo.

    As for UI, I actually prefer the cleaner UI that lightwave has, though I would like many functions of scaling and such which blender have…and also changing colors in realtime in blender UI, but otherwise I still feel itīs too cluttered, some icons are really bad…and panels flowing in the wrong direction, I hate vertical running text in sidebars/panels…that was the first thing I changed in Daz studio for instance, at least I could configure that, in blender…probably not.

    The Lightwave UI tells you what each button is, no guessing of icons…and often tools are more directly accessable, but blender is made to be a kind of, Use it a lot …to get used to icons, and use it a lot to get used to the shortcut and go about it this way…itīs not very nice when you have to go in to drop down lists for selections etc…so shortcuts yes, in Lightwave modeler that I feel is more focused, by a menu for the action and exposed selections with a click in the left sidebar, not drop down lists which you also have to expand to the right with mouse to get to your choices.

    I also like that I can configure every menu and button exactly as I want it, add my own buttons to each script or toolset, and re-arrange them in to my own menus or in my own right mouse click open buttons.
    Iīm sure thereīs a way of customize blender similar…but perhaps not as easy?

    So yes…I praise many things like this and also the vast amount of procedurals lightwave has, and layering textures, procedurals on top of eachother, both for displacement with alpha mode options, and for surfacing, for volumetrics, for fluids, for particles, and this is the part of blender I do not like."

  6. #576

    Tone mapping is one of the few new features I liked.
    it is Glorious.  

    in my humble opinion of course.


    LW vidz   DPont donate   LightWiki   RHiggit   IKBooster   My vidz

  7. #577
    RETROGRADER prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    sweden stockholm
    Posts
    16,786
    Quote Originally Posted by erikals View Post

    it is Glorious.  

    in my humble opinion of course.


    It just took too long time to arrive, ivé been using it in another software for quite some time already though, but great..finally itīs here..so itīs not a complaint about it, just need a lot more of other things to arrive before or if I would even consider upgrading.

    Darnit..I shouldnīt post about these things anymore..but Cageman poked on me, several days after my reply..so

  8. #578

    GPU rendering will be "demoted" to realtime tasks and CPU rendering will continue as usual, but way faster than before.
    not so sure about that.

    GPU is here to stay for rendering, it is cost efficient when having many on them on 1 computer.

    tho' nice that AMD stepped up the game.

    as for the Octane renderfarm, not a fan, because of the cost / policy / reliability.
    a Blender renderfarm seems nice, but haven't tested it / read much about it in terms of stability.
    LW vidz   DPont donate   LightWiki   RHiggit   IKBooster   My vidz

  9. #579
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Stockholm
    Posts
    1,480
    Quote Originally Posted by Cageman View Post
    I'm one of those that do not want LW to become a GPU renderengine. However, I want LWs renderengine to become GPU accelerated.

    Two very different things.

    If you all take a moment an look around... CPUs had a fairly long time of stagnation. GPU renderengines came about.... with a fair share of limitations to boot, but a single GPU would be 8 times faster than a CPU. Fast forward...

    2020, AMD have, in my opinion, made a paradigm shift in CPU capabilites. And, compared to Intel, made them extremely lowcost. If AMD continues this thread of developement, LightWave or any other CPU-based renderengine will, slowly but certanly, remove the need of a GPU based renderengine.

    CPU rendering will, if AMD keeps up their work, become a fight between Realtime rendering and Offline rendering. This is where I see GPU render engines (Octane and Redshift with their share set of limitations) die. Because CPUs will be as fast as GPUs for Offline rendering.... initially at a much higher cost, but, without limitations... if AMD keep things up, the only thing GPUs will do better are realtime rendering.

    GPU rendering will be "demoted" to realtime tasks and CPU rendering will continue as usual, but way faster than before.
    Isn't this kind of a moot point though? Since realtime rendering is already being used live in motion pictures. SW Rogue one & Mandalorian for example. If anything I'd say the realtime rendering part is something to pay attention to, since they would need tools to make the even more advanced animations & VFX for it. (Not just Maya) we're already reaching diminishing returns as far as realtime goes.
    Last edited by MichaelT; 05-01-2020 at 04:47 PM.

  10. #580

    just need a lot more of other things to arrive
    you could always add plugins instead tho'
    - Deep rising
    - Turbulence
    - LWcad
    - 3rd Powers
    - OD Toolset
    - RHiggit! / IKB RR Tools
    - Syflex
    - db&w
    LW vidz   DPont donate   LightWiki   RHiggit   IKBooster   My vidz

  11. #581
    RETROGRADER prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    sweden stockholm
    Posts
    16,786
    Quote Originally Posted by erikals View Post

    you could always add plugins instead tho'
    - Deep rising
    - Turbulence
    - LWcad
    - 3rd Powers
    - OD Toolset
    - RHiggit! / IKB RR Tools
    - Syflex
    - db&w
    Nope..none of it overcomes the issues no GPU native solutions, and Implementation of modeling tools in Layout..those are the 2 most important factors I would say.
    As for Deep rising, not been that impressed with what I see, I would more likely use the other you know tool we do not speak about for that, same with turbulenceFD, it lacks many things I get for free in the other you know what.

    The hair styling needs ability to cut with ease..not in modeler..I do that in the other software that has a better mesh awareness than Lightwave, so ..Lightwave really needs the proper mesh implementation in Layout.

    Lw cad, there are some things in that other software you know?..that does some things I need for free, and I said to myself, I will not invest in Lw cad until I see a decent indication or implementation of
    modeling tools inside of layout..that is where they need to take to another level to empower us users.

    And that software also has those 2 primary core task I spoke of initially here.

    Not sure when I get the time to try the 2020 trial out, Im sure some thing will be better for me, some wonīt but I am not motivated that much to even try it out right now..perhaps withing 6 months or so, I need to
    focus on something else right now..and continue to use Lw 2019 a little bit ..but that wil mostly be a showcase of how we do things in Lightwave and in another software..a comparison recording session.

    Not sure if I should split the comparison in to 2 vids each for each software or bundle the whole comparison in one vid per task instead.

    I reckon the hair is a bit faster perhaps..but itīs not enough with a little faster, the GPU rendering I get in you know what is Much faster, so adressing hair combing, cuts. (modeling tools in layout) and a GPU solution..those two things again, and that is just one example.

    The fracture tools are way too aged in Lightwave...and they need to get to work inside of layout..which now is broken from 2015, it used to work crudely anyway.

  12. #582

    yeah, i guess no 1-app fit all...


    LW vidz   DPont donate   LightWiki   RHiggit   IKBooster   My vidz

  13. #583
    pass:sword OFF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Russia
    Posts
    1,085
    The basis of everything is the concept and objective circumstances of its implementation. Based on what we see in the new version of the LW, the concept directly rests on the capabilities of the LW3d team. Those. Apparently the team has a desire to develop the program, but there are no opportunities to do this in broad steps. In this connection, the development is divided into stages - which are separately in strength for the lW3d team. The previous stage, as I understand it in general terms, is the transfer of drugs to the Hydra engine and the addition of a new shader system, coupled with new volumetrics. The renderer turned out to be the bottleneck in the 2018-2019 cycle, not counting, of course, the Modeler. Accordingly, the next logical step was a complete rewrite of the renderer. But given the real capabilities of the team and the complexity of this task, by and large, the team had no time and energy left for anything else.
    Further, it can be assumed that after eliminating the most frequent bugs of the renderer, the forces of the team can be redirected to the oldest part of the LW - Modeler. And here surprises are possible in the form of a combination of Layout and Modeler. But this is only my personal fantasies ))

    BTW. I think Juanjo expressed a very important idea here:

    Re: Changes in LightWave 2020, and What it Means for Octane
    Postby juanjgon ŧ Fri May 01, 2020 5:32 pm

    I'm fairly sure that some of these new LightWave core features are going to help in the future Octane plugin development, and there are more new features not listed there, like the API to support viewport rendering from external engines, etc.

    Supporting the LightWave development updating your licenses to LightWave 2020 is important if you want to have LightWave alive and ready to continue working with Octane for LightWave. Even if you don't see any new feature that could improve your workflow, there is a ton of bug fixes, performance improvements, and as you say, new core features, that help in the future development and support of the Octane plugin.

    Thanks,
    -Juanjo
    Last edited by OFF; 05-01-2020 at 08:43 PM.

  14. #584
    RETROGRADER prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    sweden stockholm
    Posts
    16,786
    Quote Originally Posted by erikals View Post
    yeah, i guess no 1-app fit all...


    You got email...almost, at least a private message

  15. #585

    tested and sent you a reply


    LW vidz   DPont donate   LightWiki   RHiggit   IKBooster   My vidz

Page 39 of 45 FirstFirst ... 293738394041 ... 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
  •