Lightwave gpu renderer?

[genesis1]

Well we all know its never going to happen now, but I've always been curious why there has never been a gpu option in LW and also one that didn't involve having its own shaders like Octane. Other software have ability to just either use cpu or gpu with its own shaders.
I'm sure the more technical can explain the problems, I just wondered why it never arrived in LW.

[MichaelBeckwith]

I think there has been always a bit of doom and gloom with some "pro" Blender people putting Lightwave down here on the forums. It isn't totally out of the realm of possibility that there "might" be a Lightwave 2021 or even a later version with GPU rendering. At the moment there has been NO official statements and in the lack of any official comments a few of people are possibly wrongly declaring Lightwave to be dead officially dead. I think we have to wait and see.

[genesis1]

Well considering the developers have all gone and there seems to be no one addressing bug reports it doesn't look good. I would like to hope, but have to say I've resigned myself to the prospect now, and it would be very easy for the company to nip this in the bud so as not to lose sales, but nothing is said, no replies to bug reports, no bug fixes.... All adds up to it being over sadly.

[Sensei]

I am getting replies to bug reports within a couple minutes after sending them..

[genesis1]

Is it auto replies? Earlier in the year I was getting replies and responses but my last 2 bug reports I've had nothing.

[prometheus]

I think there has been always a bit of doom and gloom with some "pro" Blender people putting Lightwave down here on the forums. It isn't totally out of the realm of possibility that there "might" be a Lightwave 2021 or even a later version with GPU rendering. At the moment there has been NO official statements and in the lack of any official comments a few of people are possibly wrongly declaring Lightwave to be dead officially dead. I think we have to wait and see.

When birds have flown away, there is no more birds to give you the garden of sound, it´s a clear indication that something isn´t right in that garden.
All the signs availabe from development and releases, to developers being cut off or leaving by themself..up to the very development statement from vizrt is a clear sign that something gone sour for the moment.

Not sure how many more signs anyone needs to be convinced, they are stacked on top of eachother ..cake on cake, which it wasn´t true..but it is.
I wonder how many 3rd party devs would be interested in to join a new development team, if possible? It does however require a true intent to continue the development, and all the signs (right now) says there isn´t any intent.

Sensei need to move, or work at a distance, and get an offer he can´t refuse of course.

[genesis1]

Anyway... Moving back to my original question.Any thoughts??

[RPSchmidt]

Anyway... Moving back to my original question.Any thoughts??

There are many threads on here about the lack of a GPU rendering engine for Lightwave and they discuss the challenges of implementation pretty thoroughly. Personally, pre-2019, that was the feature I was most hoping they would implement, even if it was just an adoption of AMD ProRender modified to work with the native shading system.

Only the devs can actually answer why there has never been a GPU rendering solution, or whether or not one was ever in the works.

[prometheus]

There are many threads on here about the lack of a GPU rendering engine for Lightwave and they discuss the challenges of implementation pretty thoroughly. Personally, pre-2019, that was the feature I was most hoping they would implement, even if it was just an adoption of AMD ProRender modified to work with the native shading system.

Only the devs can actually answer why there has never been a GPU rendering solution, or whether or not one was ever in the works.

For me the lack of GPU rendering is the big culprit, especially with the slow fiberf hair, and the gi on volumetrics, that is one part why I try to work more with blender for some of that stuff.it simply goes much much faster, and I don´t want to spend yet more one a third party solution like octane to make up for that native renderer.

I recall some interviews with newtek I think, where they decided it wasn´t worth going that path, but not much more than that, in my opinion as I said many years ago...A Huge mistake.

[RPSchmidt]

For me the lack of GPU rendering is the big culprit, especially with the slow fiberf hair, and the gi on volumetrics, that is one part why I try to work more with blender for some of that stuff.it simply goes much much faster, and I don´t want to spend yet more one a third party solution like octane to make up for that native renderer.

I recall some interviews with newtek I think, where they decided it wasn´t worth going that path, but not much more than that, in my opinion as I said many years ago...A Huge mistake.

Same; for just about any simulation, I'm going to go to Blender for rendering. I love the results from LW... but it just takes sOOOOOOoooo long.

I am considering finally going to Octane. I just think it sucks that I have to learn yet another node / shader system.

[prometheus]

Same; for just about any simulation, I'm going to go to Blender for rendering. I love the results from LW... but it just takes sOOOOOOoooo long.

I am considering finally going to Octane. I just think it sucks that I have to learn yet another node / shader system.

Octane, if you are a pro, have a good salery or need it in work..just get it, feels like it is a must requirement for pro work.
For me as hobby user still, octane isn´t an option, licensing and pricing...apart from that it is the nodal shading system that may be tricky as you say.
Results are nice though.

I have the free blender octane version, but it´s messy with the server licensing, and it was unstable with volumetrics..so I kind of got tired of it, may check later releases and have a go at it again later though.

[RPSchmidt]

Octane, if you are a pro, have a good salery or need it in work..just get it, feels like it is a must requirement for pro work.
For me as hobby user still, octane isn´t an option, licensing and pricing...apart from that it is the nodal shading system that may be tricky as you say.
Results are nice though.

I have the free blender octane version, but it´s messy with the server licensing, and it was unstable with volumetrics..so I kind of got tired of it, may check later releases and have a go at it again later though.

I'm a pro, at least in the sense that I create 3d models and animations for a living (3d generalist and motion graphics / multimedia) but my employer tends to resist adding more software, even though every time we do, they and our clients love the results... which turns into more work and more demand. So you'd think they would be a little looser with the purse strings.

I'm trying to transition to freelance, or at least, start doing freelance part-time. That's why I've been considering Octane.

Still have some other software and hardware I'd like to purchase and a ton of training to go through on software I've already purchased for my freelance work, so it's a balancing act on what to tackle in what order.

[Nicolas Jordan]

I remember Mark Granger said after he was let go by Newtek aroudn the time of the LW2018 release he was already starting to look into what it would take to bring native GPU rendering into Lightwave. This would confirm that it probably was on the road map at one point under Rob Powers.

[raymondtrace]

...This would confirm that it probably was on the road map at one point under Rob Powers.

We also see evidence of where certain devs went after LW. One particular dev is working for a GPU render application now. It is unlikely that position was given to someone who had no GPU render dev experience.

[Amerelium]

...aren't there certain effects that GPU rendering cannot do? I remember reading something about that a few years back - don't remember the details, but it was on the list of why CPU rendering can be preferable.