Oh yea. Octane for Carrara

178101213

Comments

  • PhilWPhilW Posts: 5,116
    edited April 2014

    PhilW said:
    And then last week I had a holiday!
    Cool! Did you have fun?
    One of these years, you should come to Wisconsin. ;)

    Yes, we had a week in Corfu, stunning scenery, lots of interesting old fortresses and palaces, great food and wine - definitely recommended. We've not been to Greece before, but we're definitely interested in exploring more of it now!

    Coming back to Octane, you can control the color of the sky and in your example, I would make it a bit less blue - it should be cool, but probably not as strongly blue. I've just been looking at the bright sunlight in my holiday snaps for reference...

    Post edited by PhilW on
  • Rashad CarterRashad Carter Posts: 1,779
    edited December 1969

    Well, one thing that gets me in the 'lighting' industry is the use of the word "bounce".
    For one, it's inaccurate. Light reflects, it doesn't bounce.
    But for another, it misleads. If we think of any surface that has a chance to bounce the light, we might get the impression that we need to figure out where the light goes next, which might be somewhat accurate. But if, instead, we consider that light (and therefore, color) is reflected from the surface, we can relate to the idea that the reflecting surface will show the color that's above it, in the reflection. So a highly reflective surface, like a mirror, laying flat on the ground, will reflect what is according to the angle of the viewer - not just color, but details as well. Something like concrete, which is more textured and a lot less reflective, might pick up some color, but nearly no detail.

    Thinking along those terms, and using the book: Digital Lighting & Rendering, for advice, we need to have a reason for every light in the scene. The sunlight appears yellow/orange for a very good reason. Our sun. But the ambient brightness of the sky, in areas blocked from the direct sunlight, would get a majority of its color from the sky, unless it, too, was blocked. But in that case, it wouldn't be as bright, either, unless it had some other source.

    I see. Good info, thanks. So In the case of the street scene above the road is getting it's light from the sky more than the sun, and due to the low sun in the sky it is getting blocked by the houses, hence why it could be blue.

    After looking at both images by SCi-Fi I agree the second one looks much better.

    I agree 100% with the advice Dartanbeck is giving about the sun and the skylight. I will also add that the sun is yellower and more reddish near the horizon than it is when it is higher up in the sky. While the sun is indeed yellow/green, it gets a lot of its apparent yellow color from being filtered through the atmospheric column and the column is thickest at the horizon. Knowing the proper amount of yellow for the time of day you are seeking is important. The blue from the skylight is an indicator of the weather more than anything. An extremely blue skylight means there are no clouds, and that the sky itself is deep blue. You can get away with less blueness, but it means there must be some degree of thin cloudiness in the sky such that the sky appears partially white and overcast and not as blue tinted.

    I realize this is an Octane thread so most of the hard work is being done for you, but these light color concepts are important to understand if you are ever seeking to Fake the GI in a convincing manner. Like if your graphics card ever died or you needed rendering for an animation faster than Octane could produce it. There is a dance of two primary colors, gold and blue and most any time of the day can be easily represented when you know how to wield these two colors.

    Early Morning / Late Evening: Very orange sun with low brightness intensity and very soft shadows + deep blue skylight = a scene similar to the first example Sci-Fi uploaded.

    Mid Day (High Noon): Slightly yellow tinted sun but not too much, very bright, rather sharp shadows + deep blue skylight = a scene similar to the second example uploaded by Sci-Fi.

    The magic happens in the areas where the gold tinted direct sunlight and the blue tinted skylight are allowed to mix and overlap producing the illusive greenish light that most of us don't notice consciously but that is always there in a good outdoor lighting simulation. You'll notice this greenish around the corners of edges especially on bevels and the like.

    That last thing I would add is that light bounces back upward from the ground into the sky as well. A good fake GI simulator will attempt to account for the light bouncing back up into outer space as well. This light from the ground is almost always slightly gold tinted due to the color of the sun illuminating it and also due to the rarity of blue in the natural world other than near bodies of water. If the ground is covered with green grass then one might consider this upward light needing a slightly greenish tint. Without this localized gold correction the blue from the sky will overtake the scene making it appear underwater. So gold from the sun mixes with blue from the sky which gets further tweaked by the secondary gold bounce of light from the ground plane area.

    I am going to disagree slightly with Dartanbeck on the usage of the term bounce, and why for me it is an easier term to understand than reflection. I think that in the minds of most people, a reflection is a sharp image of the surroundings in a mirror like fashion (specular). Only those people with a background in CG tend to separate reflection into two types, specular and diffused. Reflections are diffused by the degree of bumpiness on the surface, such that as Dartanbeck stated, concrete doesn't reflect crisp images of the environment but it does at least pick up the general colors of the objects around it. We also know that a "reflection" is camera angle and light angle dependent phenomenon. What you see depends on where you look and which direction the light comes from. With indirect lighting, the diffused nature of the indirect light takes away primary camera dependence. What I'm saying is that with a true reflection, the angle of the outgoing light has been determined at least in part by the direction the incoming light ray has taken. But on a diffused surface, the angle of exit for the light rays will be totally independent of the direction of the incoming rays.

    GI simulations are based in statistics, not absolutes. For me the term bounce indicates that the light rays are always moving in a statistical manner, and that there is a temporal sequence to the bounces and that there must be a loss of energy with each bounce until we reach black. Not every surface bounces at the same time. First, we must calculate which surfaces receive direct lighting. If the direct lighting is white and the first surface it strikes is a red colored surface, then we know that when the first white photons strike the red surface that some of energy of the white photon will be absorbed, leaving a red colored photon to exit. However, a good GI simulator knows that the angle of exit of that outgoing ray is not determined by the angle of the incoming ray but is indeed totally independent. so this red colored ray could be fired in just about any direction on its way to the next surface. And this is why sampling rates are so important, because the more rays per pixel that are calculated, the more of those random angles which get explored which in turn leads to a smoother more accurate GI simulation. I believe the name for these random directions of ray firing is called Scattering, and it is essential to the production of noiseless results.

  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 18,114
    edited December 1969

    Yup. Surfaces can bounce, and things can bounce off of surfaces. Light, on the other hand, does not. Diffuse reflections appear to be entirely independent of the angle of the incoming light due to the scatter and absorption going on, but also due to the fact that the actual reflectivity of such materials is really quite low compared to surfaces with specular reflections, which have higher levels of reflectivity. When it comes down to it, that's all just a bunch of stuff that gets drilled on me having a retired astrophysicist buddy. And in his world, the difference between bouncing and reflecting is enormous. But to me, his explanation of it just helps me as a CG artist to understand what's going on. When a ball bounces from the floor, the shadow is caused not from a bounce at all, but from the light being reflected away, scattered or absorbed. Someone else could certainly better explain it than me.

  • Sci Fi FunkSci Fi Funk Posts: 1,182
    edited December 1969

    Thanks Rashad.

    So actually I had it more right in the first one then if the time was supposed to be early evening in the summer. Never the less the second one is kinder to a wider range of monitors. In the first I run the risk of the whole thing looking too dark on a monitor which is not set bright.

    This is always the other issue, trying to get your image seen as you intended it on a wider audience as possible.

    Anyway I've copied and pasted your reply to refer to when I'm thinking about colours - so thanks for taking the time to put in a detailed reply.

  • Sci Fi FunkSci Fi Funk Posts: 1,182
    edited December 1969

    Thanks Rashad.

    So actually I had it more right in the first one then if the time was supposed to be early evening in the summer (as it is in the animation). Never the less the second one is kinder to a wider range of monitors. In the first I run the risk of the whole thing looking too dark on a monitor which is not set bright.

    This is always the other issue, trying to get your image seen as you intended it on a wider audience as possible.

    Anyway I've copied and pasted your reply to refer to when I'm thinking about colours - so thanks for taking the time to put in a detailed reply.

  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 18,114
    edited April 2014

    For anyone just chiming in, here's The Octane Render Homepage and here's a Demo video for Octane in Carrara plugin, which is still under development.

    Really exciting stuff. I find it impressive how quickly Octane is performing those real-time updates in Carrara. It really doesn't seem like a huge investment, by taking a guess that the whole package, Octane renderer and Carrara plugin, if similar to Poser, LightWave, etc., will be a total of roughly somewhere just under $500 USD. Seeing that, and just taking a glance at what's going on here, I'm already starting to save for it. Whether I use it or not, in my opinion Otoy deserves some resources just for supporting my favorite software.

    Any Render engine options that we can get are an excellent enhancement to our software. It gives us that much more flexibility in what we do.

    Post edited by Dartanbeck on
  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 18,114
    edited December 1969

    Ooops... sorry Steve! Just to clear things up. When I said that I thought you had it spot on, I was referring to the second image, after you've brightened it. Kind of a bummer that we end up losing most of that nice little ray coming in from the left, but we're actually 'seeing' the van flying through rather than enjoying the glimpses of serenity ;)

  • Sci Fi FunkSci Fi Funk Posts: 1,182
    edited December 1969

    Ooops... sorry Steve! Just to clear things up. When I said that I thought you had it spot on, I was referring to the second image, after you've brightened it. Kind of a bummer that we end up losing most of that nice little ray coming in from the left, but we're actually 'seeing' the van flying through rather than enjoying the glimpses of serenity ;)

    Yeah. Cheers. Like I said Image 2 is more practical for more monitors, but it hightlights that at some point (soon) I need to learn more about natural light than just observing it. Although that is valid study as well.

    Hopefully Dustrider or someone else can chime in with some pics as well soon, otherwise you've got me churning them out for the time being. :D

  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 18,114
    edited December 1969

    Hmmm... you're right. This page is nothing but our ranting text! Who wants to look at that?!!! Better post another before it's too late! ;)

  • Sci Fi FunkSci Fi Funk Posts: 1,182
    edited April 2014

    Multi Storey Car Park - To be featured in Episode 10 of Sci Fi Funk.

    2000 samples in about 7 mins. Nb. I'm still using daylight, just with different colors and reduced in power to add indirect lighting into the scene.

    car_park.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 1M
    Post edited by Sci Fi Funk on
  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 18,114
    edited December 1969

    Looks fantastic! What does Nb mean?

  • PhilWPhilW Posts: 5,116
    edited April 2014

    Looks fantastic! What does Nb mean?

    NB = Nota Bene (Latin), meaning Note Well. Maybe its one of those things that doesn't cross the Atlantic that much.

    By the way, car park scene looks great! Have you tried with no environmental light, just the light from the tubes? I'd be interested to see how that compares.

    Post edited by PhilW on
  • magaremotomagaremoto Posts: 1,177
    edited December 1969

    PhilW said:
    Looks fantastic! What does Nb mean?

    NB = Nota Bene (Latin), meaning Note Well. Maybe its one of those things that doesn't cross the Atlantic that much.

    By the way, car park scene looks great! Have you tried with no environmental light, just the light from the tubes? I'd be interested to see how that compares.

    Not Bad, PhilW, Not Bad; anyway as an italian native I would suggest to write it "n.b." that's the correct format.
    As for the car park, it seems too dark under and inside cars, maybe more power to lights would be worthy testing

  • Sci Fi FunkSci Fi Funk Posts: 1,182
    edited April 2014

    Thanks for the comments guys.

    Please note (n.b.) the following in my comments below. All vehicle windows are blacked out in the future for privacy reasons, which is why they look too dark.

    I tried with no environmental light, of course it's more dramatic, but the foreground pillars (nearest edge) are too dark. Reminds me of my early days on DAZ, where things out of the light were black.

    Pretty sure that would not be ok in this scene. I also tested it with the lights up brighter, but then the floor is washed in colour and you don't get the streak of light in the foreground.

    I guess it's taste. Also In my current level of development I'm constantly pondering correctness over the look I want. I wonder what the right answer is? I'm going with the look I want atm, but I'm aware that I need to keep it real as well.

    Here is the scene animated. It has a lighting issue. Is this a GI problem?

    The lighting rig is discussed in the about section of the video. Any help greatly appreciated.

    Now it becomes apparent the scene is too dark by the way!!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RallDje2P88

    Post edited by Sci Fi Funk on
  • PhilWPhilW Posts: 5,116
    edited December 1969

    That lighting issue is odd - I'm not sure why it is happening, but I wouldn't be surprised if it is connected with using the Direct Lighting kernel. Maybe there is a setting under that that may help? (Can't check at the moment).

  • Sci Fi FunkSci Fi Funk Posts: 1,182
    edited April 2014

    Another problem solved.

    Elevator lighting. (At least my idea so far).

    It's easy in OCTANE.

    Turn environment off (power 0), set some ceiling lights on (emitters power 1700) I had 4 little bulbs, and I liked the F125CD Camera Response. This is a non-frame from Episode 2, but typical of what the new lighting will look like.

    The one firefly would have to be on his face! I'd have to edit that out in post I guess.

    P.S. I'm still not into editing materials, so please ignore those errors in your assessment for now. Sorry if this offends you artistic skills! I have to concentrate on lighting as the main issue for now.

    SF_2_In_lift_389spix_2mins31secs_6.66mssec_F125CD_.jpg
    1914 x 1082 - 2M
    Post edited by Sci Fi Funk on
  • Sci Fi FunkSci Fi Funk Posts: 1,182
    edited December 1969

    DAZ Carrara OCTANE Render TUTORIAL Part 1 Multi Storey Car Park.

    Covers exporting from CARRARA, to DAZ then rendering in OCTANE.

    In part 1 I talk about lighting only.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdPrZCE3lBo

    In part 2 (out soon) I go onto materials.

  • PhilWPhilW Posts: 5,116
    edited April 2014

    Interesting tutorial, thanks for sharing. I can't help thinking that if you are using Octane's sky environment, you are missing something by setting the sky colour to black, so that the only effect you are adding is the "sun" light (equivalent to a distant light in Carrara). So you are getting no light coming in from other directions. I'd be tempted to set the sky to a mid to dark blue shade (you are setting the intensity low anyway) so that you get some illumination from the sky as well, as you have taken the trouble to have gaps in the walls to allow that in.

    P.S. Nice lift lighting by the way!

    Post edited by PhilW on
  • Sci Fi FunkSci Fi Funk Posts: 1,182
    edited April 2014

    Thanks Phil.

    Yeah - I think that is a lift look. Artificial and all.

    Re: the environment lighting, it IS adding light. Even though I set the colours to black and silver, it's the power setting that add light and time of day. If you have octane I advise try it.

    The effect is to add some light to unlit areas (unlit by the main light in the scene) - it's a neat cheap way of adding ambient light imho.

    Here we go with a definite WIP, I'm just in show and tell mode atm. This is the same technique but this time I've let normal sunlight flood in on pic 1, but i'm back to my black (grey) and silver idea on pics 2 and 3.

    There is a lot of modelling to go on this one - so far it's a kit bash of two of my fav sci fi sets, one from Stonemason, the other one from coflek-gnorg.

    Also pics 2 and 3 my first real attempts with Octane high DOF blur settings.

    Pic 2 hosts the Titling for laying down the law. It's a list of citizens responsibilities. I would welcome any suggestions for how to fit this in (It's a long short wall, so my original Idea of it fitting neatly into one shot is out.

    I'm not good at titles. I guess I'll go for 3d text for the main text, something like "GANZHILL TOWERS", then I guess the rest is smaller text, but I'm not sure how to make it look good. I'll go off and look at reference material, but any ideas welcome at this stage.

    GHT_Ground_Floor_Lobby_3.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 1M
    GHT_Ground_Floor_Lobby_2.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 821K
    GHT_Ground_Floor_Lobby.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 1M
    Post edited by Sci Fi Funk on
  • DustRiderDustRider Posts: 2,536
    edited December 1969

    Si Fi Funk - really great stuff here, thanks for sharing so much. I'm learning a lot from your posts.

    I've been trying to get another image out with some lighting fun, but I seem to be finding the right combination to make OcDS really unstable with the latest version (plus I've had several other things taking up my time lately). Maybe within a week or so.

  • Sci Fi FunkSci Fi Funk Posts: 1,182
    edited December 1969

    dustrider said:
    Si Fi Funk - really great stuff here, thanks for sharing so much. I'm learning a lot from your posts.

    I've been trying to get another image out with some lighting fun, but I seem to be finding the right combination to make OcDS really unstable with the latest version (plus I've had several other things taking up my time lately). Maybe within a week or so.

    Cool. Look forward to it. Looks like we are exploring in different directions which is handy. You with the whole skin/SSS thing and me with fast lighting.

    Regardless it's heading to one thing though - more expense - lol - gotta have me a GTX 780ti somehow. :)

  • Sci Fi FunkSci Fi Funk Posts: 1,182
    edited December 1969

    UPDATE.

    Thanks to an understanding partner I have a GTX 780 Ti on order with a Corsair 850 Power supply. (we are still raising the money on ebay - ahem).

    I've completed part 2 of the tutorial series below.....


    DAZ Carrara OCTANE Render TUTORIAL Part 1 Multi Storey Car Park.

    Covers exporting from CARRARA, to DAZ then rendering in OCTANE.

    In part 1 I talk about lighting only.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdPrZCE3lBo

    In part 2 I go onto easy materials.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-u9XjTWt5E <--- new today.</p>

  • Orion_UkOrion_Uk Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    Sci Fi Funk did you find out what was going on with the lighting in the car park in then end?

  • Sci Fi FunkSci Fi Funk Posts: 1,182
    edited December 1969

    Orion_Uk said:
    Sci Fi Funk did you find out what was going on with the lighting in the car park in then end?

    I must confess - I was given some homework to do and I haven't done it yet (oops).

    However I will get back to solving this because I need it for episode 10 (I'm working on ep 10 now) and it uses this car park. I'll report back soon.

  • DustRiderDustRider Posts: 2,536
    edited December 1969

    UPDATE.

    Thanks to an understanding partner I have a GTX 780 Ti on order with a Corsair 850 Power supply. (we are still raising the money on ebay - ahem).

    I've completed part 2 of the tutorial series below.....


    DAZ Carrara OCTANE Render TUTORIAL Part 1 Multi Storey Car Park.

    Covers exporting from CARRARA, to DAZ then rendering in OCTANE.

    In part 1 I talk about lighting only.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdPrZCE3lBo

    In part 2 I go onto easy materials.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-u9XjTWt5E <--- new today.</div>


    Once again, some really great stuff you shared with us, thanks!
    I've just got to ask, did you get your new card yet? If so, how's your performance now?
  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 18,114
    edited December 1969

    and a Corsair 850 Power supply.
    That's what I'm using and I love it.
  • Rashad CarterRashad Carter Posts: 1,779
    edited December 1969

    I'm so sad right now. I've recently decided I want to use Octane but I am curious if anyone can give me some advice. I work on a dual Xeon workstation. Apparently, workstation graphics cards and desktop graphics cards are very different. My current card is a Nvidia Quadro 570fx. This is a very simple card that shipped with the computer when I built it about 4 years ago. Even though the card is old it supports Cuda, so in theory this card will work with Octane. The problem is that I have no patience, and want a more powerful graphics card for rendering in Octane. As I study benchmarks I have come to realize that none of the Quadro cards can compete with even the standard GeForce graphics cards. While desktop graphics cards have higher clock speeds they are also much less accurate, which in a fast moving game environment isnt such a deal breaker. These Geforce cards are faster at Octane rendering as well. Workstations are intended for "always on" type environments, so the cards have slower performance but are more reliable and are Ecc validated. I'm beginning to wonder if I should even bother trying to run Octane on my current workstation or should I just invest in a desktop computer with a GeForce graphics card?

    Does anyone out there have any experience with running Octane on a Nvidia Quadro card? Are the rendering speeds acceptable? Which quadro card are you using and how much vram does it have? Is it quiet?

    I am also curious if anyone running a system with specs similar to mine has had any luck using dual graphics cards, one for viewing and another for gaming/Octane rendering? I have looked at the Nvidia Quadro 4000, which is affordable. I just dont know if it will do a very good job with Octane.

    System Specs
    Windows 7 Enterprise
    2x Intel Xeon Quad Core Processors 2.5ghz
    Nvidia Quadro 570FX
    18GB Ram
    Tyan Tempest Motherboard

    Any and all advice is greatly appreciated. Thanks all for your time and insights.

  • DustRiderDustRider Posts: 2,536
    edited December 1969

    I'm so sad right now. I've recently decided I want to use Octane but I am curious if anyone can give me some advice. I work on a dual Xeon workstation. Apparently, workstation graphics cards and desktop graphics cards are very different. My current card is a Nvidia Quadro 570fx. This is a very simple card that shipped with the computer when I built it about 4 years ago. Even though the card is old it supports Cuda, so in theory this card will work with Octane. The problem is that I have no patience, and want a more powerful graphics card for rendering in Octane. As I study benchmarks I have come to realize that none of the Quadro cards can compete with even the standard GeForce graphics cards. While desktop graphics cards have higher clock speeds they are also much less accurate, which in a fast moving game environment isnt such a deal breaker. These Geforce cards are faster at Octane rendering as well. Workstations are intended for "always on" type environments, so the cards have slower performance but are more reliable and are Ecc validated. I'm beginning to wonder if I should even bother trying to run Octane on my current workstation or should I just invest in a desktop computer with a GeForce graphics card?

    Does anyone out there have any experience with running Octane on a Nvidia Quadro card? Are the rendering speeds acceptable? Which quadro card are you using and how much vram does it have? Is it quiet?

    I am also curious if anyone running a system with specs similar to mine has had any luck using dual graphics cards, one for viewing and another for gaming/Octane rendering? I have looked at the Nvidia Quadro 4000, which is affordable. I just dont know if it will do a very good job with Octane.

    System Specs
    Windows 7 Enterprise
    2x Intel Xeon Quad Core Processors 2.5ghz
    Nvidia Quadro 570FX
    18GB Ram
    Tyan Tempest Motherboard

    Any and all advice is greatly appreciated. Thanks all for your time and insights.

    Rashad,
    Unfortunately your Quadro will only work with Octane V1.0, the latest version of Ocatane is 1.5. Both of the most recent versions of the Poser and DS plugins use the 1.5 dll's, and it's a safe bet that the Carrara plugin will also use 1.5. Plus, from all the specs I could find on your card, you only have 256mb of VRAM, which would really limit your ability to use Octane (you could get by with 1Gb, but 2Gb would be much better, 3-4 would very good). It also only has 16 cuda cores, your Xeons would probably out perform any GPU based rendering with this card.

    I don't know if you use any of the "high end" apps that actually take advantage of the extended quadro feature set, but for Carrara, DS, or Poser, you will get very little improvement over and equivalent desktop card. The FX 570 is also more targeted at the CAD market rather than the 3D market (and even then the performance gains are minimal). I've used Quadro cards since the late 90's, as well as Geforce and ATI FireGL Pros. I've found that with Carrara the Geforce cards are almost identical in performance and display/image quality to the equivalent Quadro. But your milage may vary.

    In fact, for many years the quadro cards were identical to their Geforce counterpart, except for the placement of a single transistor on the board that could be "easily" moved to make the geforce card a quadro and use the quadro drivers with almost identical performance. I haven't kept up with it over the past 6-7 years, but up to that point, the geforce cards were basically identical to the quadro cards, except for the protection scheme used to make using quadro drivers impossible (or at least very very difficult).

    Anyway, if there is no application specific reason to use a quadro, putting a new Gefoce in your system should improve your interactive display performance a great deal (the FX 570 has some fairly low specs compared to the current geforce lineup), and get great Octane performance as well (don't get a 750, 750ti they aren't supported yet). If you are running Maya, 3DS Max, or similar, your quadro may still give better performance, but I really doubt it. Any more, I only get the "Pro" cards for use on softcopy photogrammetry workstations that require quadbuffered stereo (a feature the is only available in the high end Nvidia and ATI Pro cards). Otherwise I stick with geforce cards, since my 3D apps are really more designed for the hobby level user, the "high end" OpenGL features are seldom implemented/used.

    Another option, if you have room in your case, an available slot on your mother board, and a big enough power supply, would be to just add a geforce card to your existing system, and use the new card just for rendering with Octane. That is actually a fairly common practice. It lets you use all of the resources on your rendering card for Octane, while you use the other card to drive your monitor(s). This may actually be the preferred and least expensive option depending on available system resorcees.

    Hope all this helps.

  • Rashad CarterRashad Carter Posts: 1,779
    edited December 1969

    Dustrider,

    Thanks!! This was exactly the information I was looking for. I am going to look into the dual card ideal because I surely want to use Octane with good speed. Thanks very much indeed!

  • Sci Fi FunkSci Fi Funk Posts: 1,182
    edited December 1969

    Dustrider.

    Not yet. The power supply arrived on saturday, just waiting for the card now. In the short term I plan to run a dual card set up GTX 780Ti (3GB) and a 4GB GTX 760.

    I lose 1GB doing this but gain in cuda cores. In the medium term I'm going to keep on ebaying to try to get a 2nd GTX 780Ti, (I paid for the first one this weekend - woohooh) then I'll sell my GTX 760.

    This will be the fastest set up I can hope for. Speed is everything for animation (lack of speed = rendering quality sacrifices).

    (to the tune of Mr Sandman) "Mr Postman (234), bring me my card (do do do do), Make her arrive now, so that I can start"

Sign In or Register to comment.