Loading...
> >

Might GPU Prices Prompt a Return to CPU-based PBR?

2

Comments

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 40,675

    ...that is the "After I win the Lotto System".

    512 GB 2133 DDR4 ECC server Ram is around 7,000$ - 8,000$.  For dual Epyc 32core CPUs (128 threads) add another 8,400$ and about 500$ - 600$ for a 16 DIMM dual socket Epyc MB.  The fact that Epyc supports eight memory channels would make this system incredibly efficient.  Ideally, you would need at least W8.1 Pro to support the 512 GB of memory, however, pretty certain Epyc wouldn't  recognise anything older W10, or Windows Server 2016 though.  Throw in a mid range memory GPU to drive the displays your drives, CPU cooling, PSU etc, and for about 18,000$ total, yeah you'd have a monster of a CPU rendering system and little worry about ever running out of memory even on the heaviest scenes in ultra high quality large resolution format.  Oh, and not just in Iray and 3DL but Carrara as well. With that many CPU threads and 8 memory channels, it would be fast, yeah maybe not up to par with a GPU, but again, this system has 21.33 times the memory capacity of a single Quadro P6000 (the highest VRAM card available).  It would look at that 32 GB of geometry and giggle. Again, all the CUDA cores or Stream Processors in the world are only good  as long as the scene file can be held in VRAM. 

    My old 12 GB three channel system can render a fairly involved 3DL scene (like the Girls at the Bus Stop one which is about 6.5 GB) at 1,500 x 1,125 resolution in pretty high quality in about 12 minutes (thank you Parris).  The beast above would probably finish rendering the same scene almost at the moment I clicked on the "Render" button.  The final version of the railway station scene I created in Iray (8.9 GB) at a moderate resolution (1,600 x 1,050) and at default render quality is currently an overnight job (and then some) as it ends up dumping to Swap Mode. With 16 times the CPU threads (each at 3.2 GHz) and about 45 times the memory capacity (as well as more than double the number of memory channels) it would probably take just over an hour, maybe even less on the Epyc system. Basically if I had the Zlotys to build this, I wouldn't need to deal with all this GPU nonsense (including W10 reserving about 17% of your cards' VRAM).   I can live with a big job taking couple hours instead of say, the better part of of a day (night) or more.  As I don't animate, I don't need render times down in the single digit minutes.

  • GreymomGreymom Posts: 1,104
    edited March 2018
    ghosty12 said:
    Greymom said:
    kyoto kid said:

    ...OK that is new from the review I read after the initial release of Epyc (they did manage to get it sort of working with W10). However, who here can afford a licence for Windows Server Edition? 

    Xeon CPUs at least support 64 bit desktop versions of Windows (up to two CPUs)

    I am seeing used, tested, 30-day warranty E5-2680V2 10-core Xeons for ~$175 on EBAY.  Some listed as new are going for about twice that or a bit more.  That's pretty darn good.  Supermicro and Asrock Rack C602 motherboards are still available, saw one of the Asrocks on sale for $280.   But, at the moment, you can still get custom-rebuilt refurbished servers as mentioned above for less than the total for the parts, through EBAY or Newegg.

    Just take note that buying hardwarre expecially CPU's off Ebay for that price they might be dodgy.. Watching a Linus Tech Tips video, they had quite a few problems with getting the system to post, not to forget that they didn't have the heatsinks of which they had to get in.. They got the system to work but it was quite the headache for them.

    On other things there is a story floating around of how Nvidia could be in hot water for anti competitive behaviour, with its GeForce Partner Program..

    Yeah, it is definately a calculated risk buying used parts off of EBAY.  Built a workstation with two used E5-2670s that booted fine initially.  Got Win 7 installed ok, got my free upgrade to Win 10 (bad move), but it started having problems.  POST says its CPU or ram.  Swapped out for new server ram, but that was apparently not the problem.  WIll go back to it with new OEM CPUs when I get a chance.  A second workstation is doing just fine.  Setting up an X79 motherboard to use for testing CPUs inividually before I risk them on the server boards.

    On the other hand, the older X8 blade server boards and X5660 cpus I bought for really absurdly low prices have had no problems so far.

    Post edited by Greymom on
  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 40,675

    ...a lot of "ifs" in that report.  I'll believe it  when I get an email from Nvidia that 1070s are back in stock and when I go there I can actually order one instead of finding the "Notify Me" button once again.

  • GreymomGreymom Posts: 1,104
    kyoto kid said:

    ...a lot of "ifs" in that report.  I'll believe it  when I get an email from Nvidia that 1070s are back in stock and when I go there I can actually order one instead of finding the "Notify Me" button once again.

    Yeah, their "notify" system kind of reminds me of the old basic game spoof.   It had a nice attract screen, but when you pushed "start game"  there was a sudden burst of sound, a moment of chaotic imagery, then a screen that said "You lose!  Would you like to play again?"

    Oh, as of this moment, the NVIDIA site has Titans in stock at only $2999.99.....

  • HavosHavos Posts: 5,321
    kyoto kid said:

    ...that is the "After I win the Lotto System".

    512 GB 2133 DDR4 ECC server Ram is around 7,000$ - 8,000$.  For dual Epyc 32core CPUs (128 threads) add another 8,400$ and about 500$ - 600$ for a 16 DIMM dual socket Epyc MB.  The fact that Epyc supports eight memory channels would make this system incredibly efficient.  Ideally, you would need at least W8.1 Pro to support the 512 GB of memory, however, pretty certain Epyc wouldn't  recognise anything older W10, or Windows Server 2016 though.  Throw in a mid range memory GPU to drive the displays your drives, CPU cooling, PSU etc, and for about 18,000$ total, yeah you'd have a monster of a CPU rendering system and little worry about ever running out of memory even on the heaviest scenes in ultra high quality large resolution format.  Oh, and not just in Iray and 3DL but Carrara as well. With that many CPU threads and 8 memory channels, it would be fast, yeah maybe not up to par with a GPU, but again, this system has 21.33 times the memory capacity of a single Quadro P6000 (the highest VRAM card available).  It would look at that 32 GB of geometry and giggle. Again, all the CUDA cores or Stream Processors in the world are only good  as long as the scene file can be held in VRAM. 

    My old 12 GB three channel system can render a fairly involved 3DL scene (like the Girls at the Bus Stop one which is about 6.5 GB) at 1,500 x 1,125 resolution in pretty high quality in about 12 minutes (thank you Parris).  The beast above would probably finish rendering the same scene almost at the moment I clicked on the "Render" button.  The final version of the railway station scene I created in Iray (8.9 GB) at a moderate resolution (1,600 x 1,050) and at default render quality is currently an overnight job (and then some) as it ends up dumping to Swap Mode. With 16 times the CPU threads (each at 3.2 GHz) and about 45 times the memory capacity (as well as more than double the number of memory channels) it would probably take just over an hour, maybe even less on the Epyc system. Basically if I had the Zlotys to build this, I wouldn't need to deal with all this GPU nonsense (including W10 reserving about 17% of your cards' VRAM).   I can live with a big job taking couple hours instead of say, the better part of of a day (night) or more.  As I don't animate, I don't need render times down in the single digit minutes.

    Remember that the scene sizes you are quoting (6.5GB, 8.9 GB) are the RAM sizes needed by DS, not the amount of VRAM required for a GPU render, which would likely be less than half those sizes. I have had scenes that reached 16GB in DS, but they took just 4GB of VRAM. As such you could render both those scenes far faster with a half decent GPU compared to using that huge beast you mentioned, and all that attached to a far more humble PC with 32GB of RAM and a fairly standard CPU. The total cost of the system should be no more than 2K or so. 

    Naturally if you prefer the look of 3DL and Carrara then yes, that massively expensive CPU rendering box would be ideal (assuming you have very deep pockets).  

  • IvyIvy Posts: 7,159
    edited March 2018

    I just hope the Pa's creating new content keep in mind the ever growing demand on high end Graphic cards& the high cost for GPU's with the ever growing waiting list for availability for Quality Graphic cards, in which if you do find one on sale , they tend to sell for 5x the normal price. I just hope they( the pa's) keep this GPU issue in mind when creating new products & start providing 3Delight mats again with their products.

    Post edited by Ivy on
  • Oso3DOso3D Posts: 14,905

    Yeah, but it's still faster for me to do somewhat to very realistic images in Iray with CPU than it is to try to do the same in 3Delight. Until THAT changes...

     

  • Male-M3diaMale-M3dia Posts: 3,581
    Oso3D said:

    Yeah, but it's still faster for me to do somewhat to very realistic images in Iray with CPU than it is to try to do the same in 3Delight. Until THAT changes...

     

    Just for giggles let CPU run a render rather than the GPU; to be honest the time really wasn't that different from when I used to do the same type of renders in 3DL with transmapped trees and reflections on water. I was pleasantly surprised. 

  • Oso3DOso3D Posts: 14,905

    I keep trying different tricks to get bounce light in 3DL, and it keeps leading me right back to 'about the same as CPU Iray.'

     

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 40,675

    ...do you have IBL Master and Reflective Radiance?

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 40,675
    edited March 2018
    Havos said:
    kyoto kid said:

    ...that is the "After I win the Lotto System".

    512 GB 2133 DDR4 ECC server Ram is around 7,000$ - 8,000$.  For dual Epyc 32core CPUs (128 threads) add another 8,400$ and about 500$ - 600$ for a 16 DIMM dual socket Epyc MB.  The fact that Epyc supports eight memory channels would make this system incredibly efficient.  Ideally, you would need at least W8.1 Pro to support the 512 GB of memory, however, pretty certain Epyc wouldn't  recognise anything older W10, or Windows Server 2016 though.  Throw in a mid range memory GPU to drive the displays your drives, CPU cooling, PSU etc, and for about 18,000$ total, yeah you'd have a monster of a CPU rendering system and little worry about ever running out of memory even on the heaviest scenes in ultra high quality large resolution format.  Oh, and not just in Iray and 3DL but Carrara as well. With that many CPU threads and 8 memory channels, it would be fast, yeah maybe not up to par with a GPU, but again, this system has 21.33 times the memory capacity of a single Quadro P6000 (the highest VRAM card available).  It would look at that 32 GB of geometry and giggle. Again, all the CUDA cores or Stream Processors in the world are only good  as long as the scene file can be held in VRAM. 

    My old 12 GB three channel system can render a fairly involved 3DL scene (like the Girls at the Bus Stop one which is about 6.5 GB) at 1,500 x 1,125 resolution in pretty high quality in about 12 minutes (thank you Parris).  The beast above would probably finish rendering the same scene almost at the moment I clicked on the "Render" button.  The final version of the railway station scene I created in Iray (8.9 GB) at a moderate resolution (1,600 x 1,050) and at default render quality is currently an overnight job (and then some) as it ends up dumping to Swap Mode. With 16 times the CPU threads (each at 3.2 GHz) and about 45 times the memory capacity (as well as more than double the number of memory channels) it would probably take just over an hour, maybe even less on the Epyc system. Basically if I had the Zlotys to build this, I wouldn't need to deal with all this GPU nonsense (including W10 reserving about 17% of your cards' VRAM).   I can live with a big job taking couple hours instead of say, the better part of of a day (night) or more.  As I don't animate, I don't need render times down in the single digit minutes.

    Remember that the scene sizes you are quoting (6.5GB, 8.9 GB) are the RAM sizes needed by DS, not the amount of VRAM required for a GPU render, which would likely be less than half those sizes. I have had scenes that reached 16GB in DS, but they took just 4GB of VRAM. As such you could render both those scenes far faster with a half decent GPU compared to using that huge beast you mentioned, and all that attached to a far more humble PC with 32GB of RAM and a fairly standard CPU. The total cost of the system should be no more than 2K or so. 

    Naturally if you prefer the look of 3DL and Carrara then yes, that massively expensive CPU rendering box would be ideal (assuming you have very deep pockets).  

    ...well I do work in Carrara and have for the most part moved back to 3DL because of the ridiculous prices for GPU cards today. 

    True that beast was jsut for a cost estimate, as it is total overkill and would require either earning a very comfortable 6 digit income or coming into a hefty windfall to afford.  More realistically, I'm looking at a render system using older dual generation dual 10 - 12 core Xeons with around 128 GB of four channel DDR3 RAM running on W7 pro with a low VRAM GPU to run the displays. Rendering in large resolution format at a high quality setting is a very memory hungry process. I'm not talking 2,400 x 1,800 but more like ten times that and larger for gallery quality prints.  Suddenly that 6.5 GB scene is now 19.5 GB  and that 8.9 GB scene is now nearly 27 GB in memory (at half that, I'd still need a 2,000$ P5000 to keep the scene in VRAM, ain't going to happen).

    Post edited by kyoto kid on
  • Oso3DOso3D Posts: 14,905

     

    kyoto kid said:

    ...do you have IBL Master and Reflective Radiance?

    I have both.

    Reflective Radiance is on par with Iray CPU.

    IBL is nice but as far as I can tell there’s no bounce light. It’s ... ok, but lacks that realistic element.

  • HavosHavos Posts: 5,321
    kyoto kid said:
    Havos said:
    kyoto kid said:

    ...that is the "After I win the Lotto System".

    512 GB 2133 DDR4 ECC server Ram is around 7,000$ - 8,000$.  For dual Epyc 32core CPUs (128 threads) add another 8,400$ and about 500$ - 600$ for a 16 DIMM dual socket Epyc MB.  The fact that Epyc supports eight memory channels would make this system incredibly efficient.  Ideally, you would need at least W8.1 Pro to support the 512 GB of memory, however, pretty certain Epyc wouldn't  recognise anything older W10, or Windows Server 2016 though.  Throw in a mid range memory GPU to drive the displays your drives, CPU cooling, PSU etc, and for about 18,000$ total, yeah you'd have a monster of a CPU rendering system and little worry about ever running out of memory even on the heaviest scenes in ultra high quality large resolution format.  Oh, and not just in Iray and 3DL but Carrara as well. With that many CPU threads and 8 memory channels, it would be fast, yeah maybe not up to par with a GPU, but again, this system has 21.33 times the memory capacity of a single Quadro P6000 (the highest VRAM card available).  It would look at that 32 GB of geometry and giggle. Again, all the CUDA cores or Stream Processors in the world are only good  as long as the scene file can be held in VRAM. 

    My old 12 GB three channel system can render a fairly involved 3DL scene (like the Girls at the Bus Stop one which is about 6.5 GB) at 1,500 x 1,125 resolution in pretty high quality in about 12 minutes (thank you Parris).  The beast above would probably finish rendering the same scene almost at the moment I clicked on the "Render" button.  The final version of the railway station scene I created in Iray (8.9 GB) at a moderate resolution (1,600 x 1,050) and at default render quality is currently an overnight job (and then some) as it ends up dumping to Swap Mode. With 16 times the CPU threads (each at 3.2 GHz) and about 45 times the memory capacity (as well as more than double the number of memory channels) it would probably take just over an hour, maybe even less on the Epyc system. Basically if I had the Zlotys to build this, I wouldn't need to deal with all this GPU nonsense (including W10 reserving about 17% of your cards' VRAM).   I can live with a big job taking couple hours instead of say, the better part of of a day (night) or more.  As I don't animate, I don't need render times down in the single digit minutes.

    Remember that the scene sizes you are quoting (6.5GB, 8.9 GB) are the RAM sizes needed by DS, not the amount of VRAM required for a GPU render, which would likely be less than half those sizes. I have had scenes that reached 16GB in DS, but they took just 4GB of VRAM. As such you could render both those scenes far faster with a half decent GPU compared to using that huge beast you mentioned, and all that attached to a far more humble PC with 32GB of RAM and a fairly standard CPU. The total cost of the system should be no more than 2K or so. 

    Naturally if you prefer the look of 3DL and Carrara then yes, that massively expensive CPU rendering box would be ideal (assuming you have very deep pockets).  

    ...well I do work in Carrara and have for the most part moved back to 3DL because of the ridiculous prices for GPU cards today. 

    True that beast was jsut for a cost estimate, as it is total overkill and would require either earning a very comfortable 6 digit income or coming into a hefty windfall to afford.  More realistically, I'm looking at a render system using older dual generation dual 10 - 12 core Xeons with around 128 GB of four channel DDR3 RAM running on W7 pro with a low VRAM GPU to run the displays. Rendering in large resolution format at a high quality setting is a very memory hungry process. I'm not talking 2,400 x 1,800 but more like ten times that and larger for gallery quality prints.  Suddenly that 6.5 GB scene is now 19.5 GB  and that 8.9 GB scene is now nearly 27 GB in memory (at half that, I'd still need a 2,000$ P5000 to keep the scene in VRAM, ain't going to happen).

    It is certainly true that the render resolution that you are talking about would need a huge amount of memory, and you could not do any optimization otherwise the textures are going to look stretched. Indeed at 24,000x18,000 a lot of textures will look rather poor when zoomed right in.

    How often do you submit gallery prints? I guess the majority of the time you are rendering test renders at a somewhat more sane resolution size.

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 40,675

    ...haven't, yet got to that point but planning to once I can get enough horsepower to do it.  Also these would be done at super high quality settings which means more memory and of course time. Printing would be done at a fine art printing service, not the corner Kinkos or at home.  I'm looking at maximum print sizes of 32 x 24". with average size of 24" x 18".  I used to paint so little 10 x 7.5 "photo prints" won't cut it.

    So far only at that first stage of testing, however, pretty much anything dealing with Iray is currently on the back burner due to lack of a powerful enough system (yet). 

  • Daywalker DesignsDaywalker Designs Posts: 3,586
    Ivy said:

    I just hope the Pa's creating new content keep in mind the ever growing demand on high end Graphic cards& the high cost for GPU's with the ever growing waiting list for availability for Quality Graphic cards, in which if you do find one on sale , they tend to sell for 5x the normal price. I just hope they( the pa's) keep this GPU issue in mind when creating new products & start providing 3Delight mats again with their products.

    And at least one has said it's not worth their while to do two sets of material presets for different render engines, without an increase in sales.

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 40,675

    ...well I've had to pass on a lot of new items I would normally purchase because they only have Iray materials. OK I'm just one customer (though been around for a while), and there are few others as well, but if it's "Iray only", it means "no sale" because its tougher to get good looking materials going from Iray to 3DL (which has a negative impact on workflow) than the other way around, even with conversion scripts.

  • Oso3DOso3D Posts: 14,905
    Daywalker Designs said:

    And at least one has said it's not worth their while to do two sets of material presets for different render engines, without an increase in sales.

    Thankfully, it's very easy to convert Iray to 3DL, particularly if someone has a lot of experience playing around with 3DL.

     

  • nicsttnicstt Posts: 11,715

    I was looking at an Asus Strix on Amazon 1080ti, for £940ish; I was tempted but thought I preferred my cash in my account, not Amazon's, Nvidia's and the Merchant.

    ... I can wait.

  • Daywalker DesignsDaywalker Designs Posts: 3,586
    Oso3D said:
    Daywalker Designs said:

    And at least one has said it's not worth their while to do two sets of material presets for different render engines, without an increase in sales.

    Thankfully, it's very easy to convert Iray to 3DL, particularly if someone has a lot of experience playing around with 3DL.

     

    While true, not everyone wants to take the time to make the needed adjustments, hence the constant polite requests for a return to providng 3DL shader presets.

  • Oso3DOso3D Posts: 14,905

    When I was only doing 3DL I was still making adjustments. I haven't seen any significant difference between 'convert from Iray, adjust' and 'look over 3DL materials, adjust.'

    If someone is ok with whatever is provided by a product, 3DL surface wise, it seems they would be open to whatever the conversion offers.

    Personally, the ONLY items I've felt compelled to play with are glass and emission. And that's basically deciding which approach I want. Which is what I do with 3DL, too. Like, a lot of 3dl products use a simple lower opacity of surfaces to make glass. But I have 3DL glass shaders... so I apply those, if I feel like it, and tweak until I get the look I want. Same thing with Iray converted to 3DL.

    Emission, do I want to use Uber AreaLight, or just ambient? Am I going to use UE2's ability to light by ambient channel? Am I using a lot of reflection?

     

  • TynkereTynkere Posts: 834
    Havos said:
     

    If you scene is using 32GB of RAM just for geometry I suspect it has not been well optimized. You would need a lot of characters at very large levels of Sub-D (ie 4+) to get to that amount of vertices/polygons. If these are not close ups of the characters in question, it is highly unlikley such a high level of sub-D will make any difference to the final render.

    The problem with never bothering to properly optimize a scene, is that once you spent the megabucks for a better machine, in no time you quickly out grow it, and are looking again at the need to upgrade.

     

    Sage advice.  Been playing with subD levels and chose memory over speed in render.  For actors, going from subD of 3 down to 1 didn’t seem to make much difference in the scene.  What a difference in memory though.  Thanks for the tip.

    @ Oso3D

    Thanks for the links.  Will give them a try.  

    To topic:

    Now that have had time to play with card, results if anyone interested.  File was from a RRRR entry that wouldn’t fit on a 1070.  Approx 13.9G

    Pixel Size 2035 x 2035
    Max path length 8 rather than -1
    Instancing Optimize: Memory
    qual: 1
    converge: 95%
    ===
    Time in GPU only mode: < 30 min.  Was done when I came back in to check.  : 0 !
    Time in CPU only mode: 1 hour, 14 min at 50% --> system unstable (heat issues) cancel render.

    So it seems (for me anyway) CPU rendering on an i7 (skylake) machine might not be an option.  That’s kind of disturbing.  Chained to a CPU & card with no plans for any more upgrades until 2020.  

    On the bright side, supply & demand?  Might have gotten a card I’d never have been able to afford because gamers want the GTX series?  Crazy, but am not looking a gift horse in the mouth. 

  • HavosHavos Posts: 5,321
    Tynkere said:
    Havos said:
     

    If you scene is using 32GB of RAM just for geometry I suspect it has not been well optimized. You would need a lot of characters at very large levels of Sub-D (ie 4+) to get to that amount of vertices/polygons. If these are not close ups of the characters in question, it is highly unlikley such a high level of sub-D will make any difference to the final render.

    The problem with never bothering to properly optimize a scene, is that once you spent the megabucks for a better machine, in no time you quickly out grow it, and are looking again at the need to upgrade.

     

    Sage advice.  Been playing with subD levels and chose memory over speed in render.  For actors, going from subD of 3 down to 1 didn’t seem to make much difference in the scene.  What a difference in memory though.  Thanks for the tip.

    @ Oso3D

    Thanks for the links.  Will give them a try.  

    To topic:

    Now that have had time to play with card, results if anyone interested.  File was from a RRRR entry that wouldn’t fit on a 1070.  Approx 13.9G

    Pixel Size 2035 x 2035
    Max path length 8 rather than -1
    Instancing Optimize: Memory
    qual: 1
    converge: 95%
    ===
    Time in GPU only mode: < 30 min.  Was done when I came back in to check.  : 0 !
    Time in CPU only mode: 1 hour, 14 min at 50% --> system unstable (heat issues) cancel render.

    So it seems (for me anyway) CPU rendering on an i7 (skylake) machine might not be an option.  That’s kind of disturbing.  Chained to a CPU & card with no plans for any more upgrades until 2020.  

    On the bright side, supply & demand?  Might have gotten a card I’d never have been able to afford because gamers want the GTX series?  Crazy, but am not looking a gift horse in the mouth. 

    Bear in mind the memory or speed optimization in the render settings is not about saving you memory at the expense of speed in all situations, but it is only about how instances are dealt with. If you have no (or few) instances in your scene, you should always select speed, even if you think that your scene is close to the VRAM limit.

  • Sven DullahSven Dullah Posts: 7,621
    Oso3D said:
    Daywalker Designs said:

    And at least one has said it's not worth their while to do two sets of material presets for different render engines, without an increase in sales.

    Thankfully, it's very easy to convert Iray to 3DL, particularly if someone has a lot of experience playing around with 3DL.

     

    You should really address it to all the vendors that refuse to include 3DL material presets because it's not worth the time and because it is not an easy process.

    What about the shaders you have in your store? Are you telling me please go ahead and buy them, they are easy to use in 3DL, it's a 2 minute conversion and bam, there you go?

  • Daywalker DesignsDaywalker Designs Posts: 3,586
    Sven Dullah said:
    Oso3D said:
    Daywalker Designs said:

    And at least one has said it's not worth their while to do two sets of material presets for different render engines, without an increase in sales.

    Thankfully, it's very easy to convert Iray to 3DL, particularly if someone has a lot of experience playing around with 3DL.

     

    You should really address it to all the vendors that refuse to include 3DL material presets because it's not worth the time and because it is not an easy process.

    What about the shaders you have in your store? Are you telling me please go ahead and buy them, they are easy to use in 3DL, it's a 2 minute conversion and bam, there you go?

    Neither is including 3DL presets for no noticeable change in sales, which is why those PAs have stopped providing them.

  • Oso3DOso3D Posts: 14,905
    edited March 2018

    No, because they are MDL (Iray) code. It’s not -possible- to adapt them to 3dl (same as AoA grass shader doesn’t convert to Iray).

    So my shaders (and similar) aren’t really part of this topic.

    (and if you only use 3dl, don’t buy them!)

    Post edited by Oso3D on
  • HavosHavos Posts: 5,321
    Sven Dullah said:
    Oso3D said:
    Daywalker Designs said:

    And at least one has said it's not worth their while to do two sets of material presets for different render engines, without an increase in sales.

    Thankfully, it's very easy to convert Iray to 3DL, particularly if someone has a lot of experience playing around with 3DL.

     

    You should really address it to all the vendors that refuse to include 3DL material presets because it's not worth the time and because it is not an easy process.

    What about the shaders you have in your store? Are you telling me please go ahead and buy them, they are easy to use in 3DL, it's a 2 minute conversion and bam, there you go?

    There is a big difference between a 2 minute job to convert just the shaders an individual needs for the parts of the product that are visible, and the time needed for a PA to convert all of the products shaders, and then tweak them to a level of quality that makes them worthy of a product that is for sale. A quick hack job is likely to result in several complaints from 3DL users that the results do not look at all like the promos, so is more hassle for the PA than it is worth.

  • Sven DullahSven Dullah Posts: 7,621
    Havos said:
    Sven Dullah said:
    Oso3D said:
    Daywalker Designs said:

    And at least one has said it's not worth their while to do two sets of material presets for different render engines, without an increase in sales.

    Thankfully, it's very easy to convert Iray to 3DL, particularly if someone has a lot of experience playing around with 3DL.

     

    You should really address it to all the vendors that refuse to include 3DL material presets because it's not worth the time and because it is not an easy process.

    What about the shaders you have in your store? Are you telling me please go ahead and buy them, they are easy to use in 3DL, it's a 2 minute conversion and bam, there you go?

    There is a big difference between a 2 minute job to convert just the shaders an individual needs for the parts of the product that are visible, and the time needed for a PA to convert all of the products shaders, and then tweak them to a level of quality that makes them worthy of a product that is for sale. A quick hack job is likely to result in several complaints from 3DL users that the results do not look at all like the promos, so is more hassle for the PA than it is worth.

    Well, fair point I guessindecision, I'm ready with this part of the discussion, we've had it a couple of times, still there is something odd about comments about how very easy IRay converts to 3DL vs how very hard it is to make 3DL material presets...

  • Daywalker DesignsDaywalker Designs Posts: 3,586
    Sven Dullah said:

    Well, fair point I guessindecision, I'm ready with this part of the discussion, we've had it a couple of times, still there is something odd about comments about how very easy IRay converts to 3DL vs how very hard it is to make 3DL material presets...

    I think it's a matter of what users might be willing to accept vs what PAs would be expected to provide with a product by DAZ  QA.

  • agent unawaresagent unawares Posts: 3,513
    Sven Dullah said:
    Havos said:
    Sven Dullah said:
    Oso3D said:
    Daywalker Designs said:

    And at least one has said it's not worth their while to do two sets of material presets for different render engines, without an increase in sales.

    Thankfully, it's very easy to convert Iray to 3DL, particularly if someone has a lot of experience playing around with 3DL.

     

    You should really address it to all the vendors that refuse to include 3DL material presets because it's not worth the time and because it is not an easy process.

    What about the shaders you have in your store? Are you telling me please go ahead and buy them, they are easy to use in 3DL, it's a 2 minute conversion and bam, there you go?

    There is a big difference between a 2 minute job to convert just the shaders an individual needs for the parts of the product that are visible, and the time needed for a PA to convert all of the products shaders, and then tweak them to a level of quality that makes them worthy of a product that is for sale. A quick hack job is likely to result in several complaints from 3DL users that the results do not look at all like the promos, so is more hassle for the PA than it is worth.

    Well, fair point I guessindecision, I'm ready with this part of the discussion, we've had it a couple of times, still there is something odd about comments about how very easy IRay converts to 3DL vs how very hard it is to make 3DL material presets...

    Iray doesn't convert to 3Delight easily. Consumers can get passable looks from Iray to 3Delight easily, which is an entirely different matter.

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 40,675
    Havos said:
    Sven Dullah said:
    Oso3D said:
    Daywalker Designs said:

    And at least one has said it's not worth their while to do two sets of material presets for different render engines, without an increase in sales.

    Thankfully, it's very easy to convert Iray to 3DL, particularly if someone has a lot of experience playing around with 3DL.

     

    You should really address it to all the vendors that refuse to include 3DL material presets because it's not worth the time and because it is not an easy process.

    What about the shaders you have in your store? Are you telling me please go ahead and buy them, they are easy to use in 3DL, it's a 2 minute conversion and bam, there you go?

    There is a big difference between a 2 minute job to convert just the shaders an individual needs for the parts of the product that are visible, and the time needed for a PA to convert all of the products shaders, and then tweak them to a level of quality that makes them worthy of a product that is for sale. A quick hack job is likely to result in several complaints from 3DL users that the results do not look at all like the promos, so is more hassle for the PA than it is worth.

    ....a little more than two minutes to convert Iray materials to 3DL.

Sign In or Register to comment.