Digital Art Zone

 
   
16 of 16
16
Carrara v8.5.0.149 (PC/Mac) Beta Update
Posted: 23 July 2012 09:46 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 226 ]
Power Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  1823
Joined  2006-02-17
JoeMamma2000 - 23 July 2012 07:09 PM

By the way, Kendall, I apologize if something I said got you so angry. That wasn’t my intent. I really am trying to learn here, not debate or argue. Just looking for some answers.


Honestly, the sense I got from your statements was nothing more than this:

That an expert 3D guy who does feature films and makes insanely gorgeous renders in one of the professional “Renderman” apps could take one of his insanely gorgeous scenes over to DAZ Studio (assume export/import is not an issue), and using the exact same scene, and exact same tools provided in DAZ Studio (lights, shadows, materials, etc.), produce a virtually identical, insanely gorgeous render. Implying that nothing in the DAZ Studio toolbox is limited or hampered compared to his other apps.


A very simple question, has nothing to do with the skill of the user, and doesn’t require reading stacks of specs.


Here’s a hypothetical to illustrate my question::


IF, for example, DAZ Studio has a Renderman renderer, but, for example, the lights don’t have any capability for generating soft shadows (again, this is a hypothetical), and the spec doesn’t require soft shadows, but the scene you’re rendering needs soft shadows, then the insanely gorgeous scene obviously will have a render that is going to look sucky. Nothing to do with the Renderman renderer, but because the main app doesn’t have some feature not covered by the Renderman spec. If something like that were the case, then it’s perfectly legitimate to say the DAZ Studio renders suck, not because of the excellent renderer, but because some features in the main app were either missing or limited or whatever. See what I’m getting at?


And the answer to that is not a stack of manuals or specifications, it’s a simple yes or no. Nothing to do with the abilities of the user, solely a function of the application.


You’re confusing the Application Interface with the Rendering Engine.  The post that started this debate was specifically about the Rendering Engine.


As it stands, DS cannot read RIB and work with it as a scene definition.  So importing a RIB from anywhere isn’t going to happen.  However, if one can export the target scene in a format readable by DS, then one could pull that scene into the interface, add content, and output RIB (or render).  Assuming that one had the .sl code for the shaders used, one could import those shaders into the DS Shader Editor and create DS native matching shaders directly from the code.  Since DS4 has the Shader Mixer, and the Shader Editor, one can work directly with Renderman Shaders directly within DS.  There is no longer a limitation, as one can code directly to the RiSpec from within DS.


Even if DS4 didn’t provide such a nice feature, one could still connect the “shaders” with the RIB once output.  This would still provide all the same power to create the scene available to all other packages.  Albeit with more effort.


As an example, Alessandro’s “Look at my Hair” project uses the Renderman RiCurves directly as a DS shader.  This allows for great flexibility, in effect adding “strand hair” to DS4 without coding it directly.  In fact, according to a post of his, he’s including the same shader in LAMH that was used in “Stuart Little”, thus providing a “professional” shader for use in general in DS4.


EDIT: This is becoming a DS debate, not about Carrara or rendering.  Let’s see if we can get it back on track.


Kendall

Image Attachments
rsl-editor.png
shader-builder.png
shader-mixer.png
 Signature 

Any opinions expressed in this post are those of Kendall Sears and may, or may not, be more, or less, valid than any other opinion.

The contents of this post are intended for the DAZ forum only, do not re-post any portion to any other forum without his permission.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 July 2012 10:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 227 ]
Power Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  1059
Joined  2007-10-15
Kendall Sears - 23 July 2012 09:46 PM

You’re confusing the Application Interface with the Rendering Engine.  The post that started this debate was specifically about the Rendering Engine.


I really don’t think I am. In fact, my point is that there ARE multiple compenents to an awesome render: The USER, the FRONT END of the application (ie, interface) and the BACK END (renderer). Or maybe even more. And to make an awesome render ALL of those components have to be awesome. Nobody is arguing that.


And my point is that when someone says it’s a sucky render, let’s pre-assume that the user is awesome, so we can take that out of the picture. So what’s left? The interface and the renderer. And when someone says it’s a sucky render (or a sucky renderer, but doesn’t understand the difference), assuming the user is awesome, that leaves the interface and the renderer that might be at fault.


Which is why I said that even though he was specific about the “renderer”, he could have legitimately thought that the interface component was lousy, therefore it was a sucky renderer? Yes, you jumped on strictly the renderer component, but I am, and have been, speaking more broadly.


Come on, Kendall, you’re just dancing around this. It’s obvious the point I’m trying to get answered, and instead of protecting what you said and citing the specifics of what was said, I’m sure you can understand the concept we’re trying to get resolved here. I can’t get any clearer, Geesh, you guys will argue and argue and argue about specific words and inflections, instead of just stepping back and discuss the issues. You guys give me a headache.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 July 2012 10:46 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 228 ]
Power Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  1059
Joined  2007-10-15

And just to show that I’m not going wacko, here’s the post I entered right after you put akulla3D on the stand for daring to challenge a Renderman-compliant renderer. I was the first to make a distinction between the renderer and the other components of a render, and suggested that while he said “renderer”, the broader issue involved the application interface.


I’ve been saying the same stuff, over and over, 3 or 4 different ways for the last 4 days trying to get an straight answer.

JoeMamma2000 - 19 July 2012 04:11 AM

I think we can all agree that what you see in the final rendered image is a function of far more than solely the work of the “render engine”. Can I get an “amen” on that?


For example it depends upon the type and character of the lights implemented in the software. Some have area and volume lights, some don’t. It also depends on the type and character of the shadows the lights cast, which can vary significantly with application. It also depends on the way materials and shaders have been implemented in the various applications. And the list goes on…


Now, I also believe that the Renderman specification is not an all-encompassing specification. And this is where I’m dredging up my foggy memory from long ago, but I recall it was a specification on the interface between the “making” and “rendering” parts of CG software. And I also recall it was fairly minimal, and left a lot of stuff up to the developers.


So I think that, bottom line, you could hypothetically take a D|S scene, transport it into one of those other Renderman compliant applications, render it right out of the box, and probably get different results. Now, whether the result is better or just different is an entirely separate thread that I want no part of. But I think it’s reasonable to assume that just because they have compliant renderers doesn’t necessarily mean that everything that goes into the resulting image is identical.


So if akulla3D perhaps overstated the “render engine” aspect, I think the basic concept of preferring the rendered output from different applications is fairly reasonable, no?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 July 2012 11:37 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 229 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  137
Joined  2005-10-11

Carrara’s limitation is that the renderer is pretty much the same now as it was then: little advancement.

 
Thanks Kendall.  So it’s basically Ray Tracing vs Radiosity?

Will study up on it to understand the difference, and get the most out of either method.


And will look at DS again to see what it can do at least for rendering. smile

 

 Signature 

My YouTube channel 
www.blenderportal.com

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 July 2012 12:09 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 230 ]
Power Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  1823
Joined  2006-02-17
megacal - 23 July 2012 11:37 PM

Carrara’s limitation is that the renderer is pretty much the same now as it was then: little advancement.

 
Thanks Kendall.  So it’s basically Ray Tracing vs Radiosity?

Will study up on it to understand the difference, and get the most out of either method.


And will look at DS again to see what it can do at least for rendering. smile

Oh no.  There are other ways:  scanline (sometimes called rasterizing), and a few others.

Radiosity is sort of the converse of ray tracing.  Instead of projecting a vector into a pixel and determining collision (ray tracing), one starts from the light source and projects outward from there.  It is much more computationally intensive as one doesn’t know if the ray one is following is heading (ultimately) for the camera until the final iteration is performed and a vector direction is determined.  Meaning that in the case where (bounces > 1)  the number of unneeded computations increases dramatically.

Kendall

 Signature 

Any opinions expressed in this post are those of Kendall Sears and may, or may not, be more, or less, valid than any other opinion.

The contents of this post are intended for the DAZ forum only, do not re-post any portion to any other forum without his permission.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 July 2012 02:38 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 231 ]
Power Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  1059
Joined  2007-10-15

I recalled an article from a couple years ago that dealt with selecting rendering software. Pretty decent article, and listed the strengths and weaknesses of the big players.

http://www.3dworldmag.com/2010/01/15/how_to_choose_rendering_software_part_1/


Personally, while the guts of how the renderers do their thing is nice to know, I think for the practicing 3D guy what’s important is the practical differences. And, like always, I suggest you first decide what you need before you decide what you want.


IF your goal is super-hyper realism, and renders that look like photographs, you’ll probably look at one group. But as with anything, you never get something for nothing, and that super-hyper realism has a cost, such as greater render time. And if you’re doing animations, that cost might be far too great, so you’ll want to look at other types of renderers. And other types of renderers typically take some sort of shortcuts to reduce render time, while also reducing some aspect of the quality of the output (“quality” being the super-hyper realism).


Some renderers also try to simulate real lights and real materials, unlike Carrara and others that have non-realistic (ie, non “physically based”) material parameters (eg, Reflection, Highlight, etc). Those are non-realistic models used to make the renders happen faster. Same with cameras, etc. Some renderers and applications allow you to enter real world camera parameters (focal length, f-stop, etc.) So if you’re trying to match a shot that was done on a set, and you know the real world parameters, and all that is important to you, then you probably want to look at some physically based renderers. But again, there’s a cost.


And like I mentioned before, don’t get caught in the trap of believing that it’s all about the renderer, when in fact it is also a function of the application (and, of course, the user). You can have the greatest renderer in the world, but if the application doesn’t take advantage of it, you’re not gonna get much. The application can make it easy or difficult to get great results, not only with lighting and shadows but with materials. If the renderer is brilliant, but you just can’t get the “shading room” or whatever to let you apply the layers of materials you want in the way you want, for example (a situation, BTW, I just encountered today in Carrara, and after hours of tweaking I still got trash…), you might be very disappointed with the results. Or, as Mr. Sears suggested, if the application provides some wonderful lighting presets that make getting those wonderfully brillant outdoor renders much easier, then you might want to consider an app like that.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 July 2012 07:28 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 232 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  88
Joined  2004-12-01

I can believe you all are still going at it.  smile  I just want this next point release to come out already so I can stablize my environment and get back to work.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 July 2012 03:01 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 233 ]
Power Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  1059
Joined  2007-10-15
akulla3D - 24 July 2012 07:28 AM

I can believe you all are still going at it.  smile  .


Are you kidding? In this forum trying to resolve even the simplest and most obvious issue usually results in days upon days of back and forth haggling over totally extraneous nonsense. It’s unfortunate, but I guess that’s just how it is.


2+2=73.5”
“Um, no, I think you’ll find that 2+2=4”
“That’s just your opinion”
“Well, no, it’s, like, a fact”
“Oh really, so when’s the last time you posted a math dissertation here to show you’re an expert?”
“Dude, just get out your calculator”
“I think you’re just a stuck up jerk”
“That’s fine, but did you check your calculator yet?”
“Don’t you know anything about hex and octal? I was clearly talking about octal and hex when I said that”
“Oh, okay, but when I check my calculator and try it in both octal and hex I sure don’t get 2+2=73.5”
“Some calculators use RPN, others don’t. My cellphone has a calculator. My cellphone is blue”
“Thanks for the info, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the issue we’re discussing”
“Dude, are you still arguing this? What a rude jerk. Leave it alone”

 

And that’s life in the Carrara forum…  smile

 

But hey, YOU STARTED THIS !!!!  smile


(By the way, the above hypothetical dialogue was merely an attempt at humor to lighten things up a bit, and in no way was intended whatsoever to cast a negative light on any individual or group in this or any other forum. I apologize in advance if anyone was offended by any word or phrase in this post, but it certainly was not my intent to offend anyone or anything.)

 

 

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 July 2012 07:13 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 234 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  137
Joined  2005-10-11

Thanks for the link to the 3DWorld article…....good overview.


It’s from Jan 2010, and things have changed, but it’s still relevant. wink

 Signature 

My YouTube channel 
www.blenderportal.com

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 September 2012 09:09 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 235 ]
New Member
Avatar
Total Posts:  4
Joined  2003-10-09

Okay. It’s now September 1st. I know that it is Labor Day weekend here in America. Fortunately, for some of us freelance artists out here do have to work. And, I rely on Carrara for some of my work. But, when the serial number for Carrara 8.5 expires on August 31, 2012, and we still would like to use Carrara 8.5 on September 1, and the app won’t launch because the serial number is not up-to-date. Really?! This is becoming very annoying. Why the delay in providing a final, legitimate serial number for Carrara 8.5?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 September 2012 10:14 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 236 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4794
Joined  2006-08-27
zedkay - 01 September 2012 09:09 AM

Okay. It’s now September 1st. I know that it is Labor Day weekend here in America. Fortunately, for some of us freelance artists out here do have to work. And, I rely on Carrara for some of my work. But, when the serial number for Carrara 8.5 expires on August 31, 2012, and we still would like to use Carrara 8.5 on September 1, and the app won’t launch because the serial number is not up-to-date. Really?! This is becoming very annoying. Why the delay in providing a final, legitimate serial number for Carrara 8.5?


Because it’s still in beta, that’s why they haven’t issued a final number. There’s still work to do. I agree it would be nice to make sure a new beta serial number was issued prior to the expiration of the previous number. It is insane however, to use a beta for work that impacts your livelihood.

 Signature 

I find it somewhat liberating not to be encumbered by accuracy.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 September 2012 08:49 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 237 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  429
Joined  2007-10-08
evilproducer - 01 September 2012 10:14 AM
zedkay - 01 September 2012 09:09 AM

Okay. It’s now September 1st. I know that it is Labor Day weekend here in America. Fortunately, for some of us freelance artists out here do have to work. And, I rely on Carrara for some of my work. But, when the serial number for Carrara 8.5 expires on August 31, 2012, and we still would like to use Carrara 8.5 on September 1, and the app won’t launch because the serial number is not up-to-date. Really?! This is becoming very annoying. Why the delay in providing a final, legitimate serial number for Carrara 8.5?


Because it’s still in beta, that’s why they haven’t issued a final number. There’s still work to do. I agree it would be nice to make sure a new beta serial number was issued prior to the expiration of the previous number. It is insane however, to use a beta for work that impacts your livelihood.

There was a new 8.5 beta build released and it’s posted in the sticky area of this forum. Please see that the SN is good still.

http://www.daz3d.com/forums/viewthread/4700/

Sorry you didn’t see this one.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 September 2012 11:30 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 238 ]
New Member
Total Posts:  3
Joined  2007-03-02

WHAT THE HELL,,.........SERIAL….........NO.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 September 2012 11:44 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 239 ]
New Member
Total Posts:  3
Joined  2007-03-02

CAN YOU PLEASE POST DAM SERIAL NUMBER BEFORE EXPIRE ZA….......................

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 September 2012 12:39 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 240 ]
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  139
Joined  2005-05-21
phantasticdevicies - 15 September 2012 11:44 PM

CAN YOU PLEASE POST DAM SERIAL NUMBER BEFORE EXPIRE ZA….......................

Calm down, please. DAZ did post an updated serial number, days ago, not in this thread because this is for an older beta but in the thread for the most recent beta, stickied at the top of the forum. http://www.daz3d.com/forums/viewreply/98301/

Profile
 
 
   
16 of 16
16