Loading...
> >

DAZ Studio Pro BETA [Project Iradium] - version 4.8.0.9!

1…5681011…25

Comments

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 40,576
    edited December 1969

    MacSavers said:
    I decided to try a render of a piece I did recently that took a bit of time with 3Delight, say about 30 minutes or more. Might've been 45, but it was never as much as an hour.

    Now, granted, I'm on a MacBook with only a 650M nVidia, so my GPU isn't much help here. I did this on the CPU only as my tests have shown that the GPU isn't making it go any faster and makes the Mac OS unstable. My MacBook Pro is from 2012 and has a 2.4Ghz i7, so it's not a slouch, but no where near a high end machine. Since I use it for my hobby, it's just fine.

    So, I started this with the hopes that it might take a couple of days making sure to eliminate my multiplane cyclorama which would make the whole scene black. Imagine my surprise when after 130 hours not a single pixel has been rendered. In 3Delight, I rendered it at 8 times the size I did for Iray, so you would think at 12.5% of size that Iray would have a little help, but after waiting over five (5) days, I gave up. I made a screenshot so you could see where I stopped it.

    From what I can tell, Iray won't be useful to most users really. Most of us are hobbyists. We can't afford the higher end stuff and on the Mac even less so. I'm not opposed to having the option, so it's not all lost, but it appears I won't be able to take advantage of it.


    ...my system, while more than adequate is nowhere near "top end" compared to specs of specs I've seen posted on the forums here:

    2.8 GHz i7, 12 GB memory, Nvidia GTX 460.

    Iray is completing renders, of a very "heavy" test scene in the way of texture maps and polys, in just over 2 hours at 1,200 x 900. I am not using any other lights save for the Iray "Sun" and "Sky".

    How much memory does your system have? My test scene has three figures, a lot of reflection, and transparency maps which take up just over 8 GB during the process.

  • none01ohonenone01ohone Posts: 862
    edited December 1969

    Just wondering if there's a way to brighten the text in the surfaces tab, or are they faded out because you can't use them?
    I cant see them on my monitor, so I have to hover over the selection, click, hover, until they change to orange. I can alter the colour in the custom section but it alters other defaults as well as the text.

    Cheers.

    faded-text.jpg
    992 x 642 - 193K
  • MacSaversMacSavers Posts: 324
    edited December 1969

    Male-M3dia said:
    MacSavers said:
    One more point of note: I use AoA's Ambient Light a lot. It seems to do the best at creating subtle shadows and lighting that I prefer in my images. It's especially good at the highlights as well.

    So, as I test, I did a quick scene with a model I've used in the past. I did a test with 3Delight with AoA's Ambient Light, a test with Iray with AoA's Ambient Light and then a test with Iray with no extra lighting at all.

    I'm not sure what's going on with Iray in regards to the whites in the image. Even the white in eyes are making her look creepy. I thought removing AoA's Ambient Light would help and it did in some areas, like the face and boots, but the eyes and tunic are basically two color, no subtlety at all. Even though the one with Iray and AoA's Ambient Light is starker, at least there's some definition in the tunic, but the boots suffer and the face is much harsher.

    I can honestly say the only situation I could see using Iray is if I absolutely have to have a daylight scene and can't get a 3Delight render to look the way I want.

    Quick question: Are you applying the iray ubershader to everything in your scene? Generally I would think everything would need to have iray shaders to be translated and render better. Also AoA lights don't work with Iray, You would use the photometric lights, HDR, and emission surfaces only, AoA lights are for a different render engine entirely.

    No ubershader. Just a blank scene.

  • MacSaversMacSavers Posts: 324
    edited March 2015

    Kyoto Kid said:
    MacSavers said:
    I decided to try a render of a piece I did recently that took a bit of time with 3Delight, say about 30 minutes or more. Might've been 45, but it was never as much as an hour.

    Now, granted, I'm on a MacBook with only a 650M nVidia, so my GPU isn't much help here. I did this on the CPU only as my tests have shown that the GPU isn't making it go any faster and makes the Mac OS unstable. My MacBook Pro is from 2012 and has a 2.4Ghz i7, so it's not a slouch, but no where near a high end machine. Since I use it for my hobby, it's just fine.

    So, I started this with the hopes that it might take a couple of days making sure to eliminate my multiplane cyclorama which would make the whole scene black. Imagine my surprise when after 130 hours not a single pixel has been rendered. In 3Delight, I rendered it at 8 times the size I did for Iray, so you would think at 12.5% of size that Iray would have a little help, but after waiting over five (5) days, I gave up. I made a screenshot so you could see where I stopped it.

    From what I can tell, Iray won't be useful to most users really. Most of us are hobbyists. We can't afford the higher end stuff and on the Mac even less so. I'm not opposed to having the option, so it's not all lost, but it appears I won't be able to take advantage of it.


    ...my system, while more than adequate is nowhere near "top end" compared to specs of specs I've seen posted on the forums here:

    2.8 GHz i7, 12 GB memory, Nvidia GTX 460.

    Iray is completing renders, of a very "heavy" test scene in the way of texture maps and polys, in just over 2 hours at 1,200 x 900. I am not using any other lights save for the Iray "Sun" and "Sky".

    How much memory does your system have? My test scene has three figures, a lot of reflection, and transparency maps which take up just over 8 GB during the process.

    I only have 16gb of memory and I'm on Mac OS Yosemite (10.10.2)

    As a rule of thumb, the test I did with Cadet Brianne took 39 seconds with 3Delight and almost 10 minutes with Iray. That's a huge difference. And using the GPU on Iray makes Mac OS 10 unstable on a MacBook Pro with a nVidia 650M GPU.

    Post edited by MacSavers on
  • MacSaversMacSavers Posts: 324
    edited December 1969

    barbult said:
    MacSavers said:
    One more point of note: I use AoA's Ambient Light a lot. It seems to do the best at creating subtle shadows and lighting that I prefer in my images. It's especially good at the highlights as well.

    So, as I test, I did a quick scene with a model I've used in the past. I did a test with 3Delight with AoA's Ambient Light, a test with Iray with AoA's Ambient Light and then a test with Iray with no extra lighting at all.

    I'm not sure what's going on with Iray in regards to the whites in the image. Even the white in eyes are making her look creepy. I thought removing AoA's Ambient Light would help and it did in some areas, like the face and boots, but the eyes and tunic are basically two color, no subtlety at all. Even though the one with Iray and AoA's Ambient Light is starker, at least there's some definition in the tunic, but the boots suffer and the face is much harsher.

    I can honestly say the only situation I could see using Iray is if I absolutely have to have a daylight scene and can't get a 3Delight render to look the way I want.

    Select the camera you are rendering with in the Scene pane and then open the Parameters pane. DS 4.8 has added a headlamp to each camera. Select the headlamp and set it to OFF for your Iray rrender. See if that helps your overexposed whites issue. Also, as mentioned, don't add AoA lights or DAZ default lights to Iray scenes.

    Yeah... therein lies a big part of the problem then. Iray seems to be designed for outdoor scenes. While indoor scenes might be possible, it would take a lot of time tweaking to get what I can get much quicker and render much faster with 3Delight.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm glad I have the Iray option, but it appears to not be something that I will use.

  • Oso3DOso3D Posts: 14,888
    edited December 1969

    That's just not true. Frankly, I think it's easier to do indoor scenes.

    But it takes time to adjust to how things work, and if you don't have the time or energy to see if it will prove worthwhile for you, that's your prerogative.

  • MacSaversMacSavers Posts: 324
    edited December 1969

    timmins.william said:
    That's just not true. Frankly, I think it's easier to do indoor scenes.

    But it takes time to adjust to how things work, and if you don't have the time or energy to see if it will prove worthwhile for you, that's your prerogative.

    From the earlier posts, it seemed to take more time. Although I do like that you can light scenes with objects.

    Still, the render times are just too long for what I do. While I could spend time adjusting and tweaking the light sources to get a satisfactory result, that would remove time away from other aspects of the project. While I am a hobbyist, I don't have unlimited time like yourself. I still have to work, take care of the kids and the house. So what time I do spend I'd like to dedicate to something that will produce results in a reasonable time frame.

    For those like yourself that can take advantage of it, I'm thrilled. I'll be the first one to 'ooo' and 'aaahhh' over your work. Sadly, until I can invest in a more powerful computer, I'll have to stick with what I can reasonably expect to get results from.

  • Oso3DOso3D Posts: 14,888
    edited December 1969

    It's an investment, like learning anything. Personally, I had my doubts at first, but now... frankly, it's _easier_ to light a scene in Iray than in 3Delight.

    With Iray, I made a scene with a fireplace and a candle. Lighting it: make fire object (mage tower) an emitting object, set it to a cool temp like 2500 or so (I forget what I used, but it looked yellowish). Make candle, look up light bulb temperature... hey, candles are listed as 1900. Set candle flame emitter to that temperature.

    Increase luminance on both appropriately. Go to the render settings (tone control), put the main window on NVIDIA Iray (so I can see an accurate preview) and increase exposure until I start seeing the scene I want.

    Done.

    In 3delight, I'd be fiddling with spotlights, weird gels, maybe uberenvironment and tweaking a bunch of stuff. Or I'd use uberarealight to turn the same objects into lights. But then I'd probably still need uberenvironment to get the effect of light reflecting off countless surfaces and filling the room. Also, uberarealights are almost as slow as Iray.


    And as for time, don't assume. I am a stay at home dad with two 6 year olds, one of which is only in half day kindergarten. And I'm responsible for cleaning and housework.

    So I have MAYBE 2 hours a day free. Kinda.

  • Robert FreiseRobert Freise Posts: 4,261
    edited December 1969

    Free time?
    I'm retired and still have very little of that

  • Cliff BowmanCliff Bowman Posts: 1,677
    edited December 1969

    Robert Freise said:
    Free time?
    I'm retired and still have very little of that

    Time is an illusion. Free time doubly so.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

  • ZarconDeeGrissomZarconDeeGrissom Posts: 5,412
    edited March 2015

    Cliff Bowman said:
    Robert Freise said:
    Free time?
    I'm retired and still have very little of that
    Time is an illusion. Free time doubly so.

    Cheers,
    Cliff

    Speeking of Time... Can some one pleas translate this from the log file, to actual hours minutes and seconds?
    Total Rendering Time: 1 days -47.-96 seconds
    The text fields in the render tab are still annoying as all bleep, and what about the displacement maps on a primitive cylinder, hmmm. I break to many things to have free time, lol.
    The glitches pointed out are not a joke by the way, fix them please.
    NewTextfieldGlitch_002.png
    571 x 433 - 21K
    Post edited by ZarconDeeGrissom on
  • barbultbarbult Posts: 23,155
    edited December 1969

    none01ohone said:
    Just wondering if there's a way to brighten the text in the surfaces tab, or are they faded out because you can't use them?
    I cant see them on my monitor, so I have to hover over the selection, click, hover, until they change to orange. I can alter the colour in the custom section but it alters other defaults as well as the text.

    Cheers.

    Go to menu Window->Style and click Select Style... If you have Darkside, change it to one of the others. I used Highway. You could also click Customize Colors... and change the interface colors to whatever suits you. Use the Preview button to see what will get changed for each item in the list, because it isn't all obvious from the names.
    Screenshot_2015-03-22_22.14_.35_.png
    392 x 781 - 38K
    Screenshot_2015-03-22_22.12_.19_.png
    528 x 555 - 48K
  • barbultbarbult Posts: 23,155
    edited March 2015

    zarcondeegrissom said:
    Cliff Bowman said:
    Robert Freise said:
    Free time?
    I'm retired and still have very little of that
    Time is an illusion. Free time doubly so.

    Cheers,
    Cliff

    Speeking of Time... Can some one pleas translate this from the log file, to actual hours minutes and seconds?
    Total Rendering Time: 1 days -47.-96 seconds

    The text fields in the render tab are still annoying as all bleep, and what about the displacement maps on a primitive cylinder, hmmm.

    I break to many things to have free time, lol.
    The iglitches pointed out are not a joke by the way, fix them please.That image name editing but first showed up in 4.7. I bug reported it and it was also acknowledged in the forum. CS says it should be fixed in the next release. I don't know if that is in the next Beta or next production release. It is one big PITA though until then.

    Post edited by barbult on
  • L'AdairL'Adair Posts: 9,479
    edited March 2015

    MacSavers said:
    I decided to try a render of a piece I did recently that took a bit of time with 3Delight, say about 30 minutes or more. Might've been 45, but it was never as much as an hour.

    Now, granted, I'm on a MacBook with only a 650M nVidia, so my GPU isn't much help here. I did this on the CPU only as my tests have shown that the GPU isn't making it go any faster and makes the Mac OS unstable. My MacBook Pro is from 2012 and has a 2.4Ghz i7, so it's not a slouch, but no where near a high end machine. Since I use it for my hobby, it's just fine.

    So, I started this with the hopes that it might take a couple of days making sure to eliminate my multiplane cyclorama which would make the whole scene black. Imagine my surprise when after 130 hours not a single pixel has been rendered. In 3Delight, I rendered it at 8 times the size I did for Iray, so you would think at 12.5% of size that Iray would have a little help, but after waiting over five (5) days, I gave up. I made a screenshot so you could see where I stopped it.

    From what I can tell, Iray won't be useful to most users really. Most of us are hobbyists. We can't afford the higher end stuff and on the Mac even less so. I'm not opposed to having the option, so it's not all lost, but it appears I won't be able to take advantage of it.

    Unless you went into the render settings and changed the Max Time, your render should have ended in two hours, if not sooner.

    Several of us on PCs are dealing with the render engine hanging. When that happens, the timer continues to count but nothing else is working. When we attempt to cancel, the program stops responding completely. I believe that is what happened to this render. Were you able to cancel normally and continue?

    Your next post shows you were able to render the single figure in Iray. Have you tried anything in between?

    I do not have a video card and do all my renders with the CPU, and I have one scene I did in 4.7 that hangs 4.8 every time I try to render in Iray, no matter how I try to optimize the objects in the scene.

    Also, if you don't convert the shaders to Iray beforehand, the program has to do it on the fly. It is conceivable one of the objects being converted caused a problem at render time.

    And finally, don't forget this is a beta, both of DAZ Studio and Iray, and it's been out for a relatively short time. By the time 4.8 is released, they should both be stable and much more consistent.

    Post edited by L'Adair on
  • Lissa_xyzLissa_xyz Posts: 6,116
    edited December 1969

    zarcondeegrissom said:
    Speeking of Time... Can some one pleas translate this from the log file, to actual hours minutes and seconds?
    Total Rendering Time: 1 days -47.-96 seconds

    1 day
    47 minutes
    .96 seconds

    So, 24h 47m and less than 1s.

    At least that's what I'm getting from it.

  • j cadej cade Posts: 2,310
    edited December 1969

    Is LIE super buggy for anyone else? Currently for me if I try to use it while the render engine is set as Iray I get instant crashes. As soon as I set the render engine to anything else it works fine, so everything's still workable, but it is a hell of a pita.

  • MBuschMBusch Posts: 547
    edited December 1969

    2 more questions about Iray:

    1) I am missing a Fresnel parameter in Iray Uber Shader. Are there any plan to bring this layer effect to the base shader?

    2) When a render finish are there some method to get some statistics beyond the render time, as sample value, convergence value, etc? Is it possible to create a script to gather these information?

  • Male-M3diaMale-M3dia Posts: 3,581
    edited December 1969

    MBusch said:
    2 more questions about Iray:

    1) I am missing a Fresnel parameter in Iray Uber Shader. Are there any plan to bring this layer effect to the base shader?

    Fresnel is one of the Top coat options I believe. It's in one of the drop downs (running a render so I can't check which one)

  • legarclegarc Posts: 45
    edited December 1969

    Male-M3dia said:
    MBusch said:
    2 more questions about Iray:

    1) I am missing a Fresnel parameter in Iray Uber Shader. Are there any plan to bring this layer effect to the base shader?

    Fresnel is one of the Top coat options I believe. It's in one of the drop downs (running a render so I can't check which one)

    You must set top coat value to greater than zero, then the options appear with the pull down for Fresnel.

  • ZarconDeeGrissomZarconDeeGrissom Posts: 5,412
    edited December 1969

    Vaskania said:
    zarcondeegrissom said:
    Speeking of Time... Can some one pleas translate this from the log file, to actual hours minutes and seconds?
    Total Rendering Time: 1 days -47.-96 seconds

    1 day
    47 minutes
    .96 seconds

    So, 24h 47m and less than 1s.

    At least that's what I'm getting from it.I'm fairly sure I didn't sleep that long, lol. Whatever it is, I would like to know, and it was under eight hours for sure.

  • JimbowJimbow Posts: 557
    edited December 1969

    Damsel said:
    Didn't mean to come off like a jerk. I was only talking about the thing I noticed in a LOT of renders by a LOT of different people. Also, I have a cold and am feeling grumpy. Trying to be helpful, but not succeeding. Sorry.

    I think many are rendering with the gamma set to 2.2 when it should really be set to 1. It makes a world of difference to the look of the image.

  • ZarconDeeGrissomZarconDeeGrissom Posts: 5,412
    edited March 2015

    Jimbow said:
    Damsel said:
    Didn't mean to come off like a jerk. I was only talking about the thing I noticed in a LOT of renders by a LOT of different people. Also, I have a cold and am feeling grumpy. Trying to be helpful, but not succeeding. Sorry.

    I think many are rendering with the gamma set to 2.2 when it should really be set to 1. It makes a world of difference to the look of the image.

    the "crush blacks" setting in the render tab under Iray is another as well. I prefer that at 0.0 instead of the default 0.2, and leave the Gama at default. For 3delight, I tried that Gama thing On, and ended up not being able to see anything in the view-field after adjusting the lights way back. So, no GC-on in my 3delight renders.

    Crush Blacks - Adjusts the lower part of the “tone mapping” of the image. When the upper part of the dynamic range becomes compressed, it naturally loses some of its contrast. This often results in a desire to regain some “punch” in the image by increasing the intensity of the lower range values. When this value is 0, the lower intensity range is linear. When raised towards 1, a strong “toe” region is added to the transfer curve so that low intensities get (softly) pushed more towards black.
    http://docs.daz3d.com/doku.php/public/software/dazstudio/4/referenceguide/interface/panes/render_settings/engine/nvidia_iray/tone_mapping/start

    Post edited by ZarconDeeGrissom on
  • JimbowJimbow Posts: 557
    edited December 1969

    zarcondeegrissom said:
    the "crush blacks" setting in the render tab under Iray is another as well. I prefer that at 0.0 instead of the default 0.2, and leave the Gama at default. For 3delight, I tried that Gama thing On, and ended up not being able to see anything in the view-field after adjusting the lights way back. So, no GC-on in my 3delight renders.

    It's certainly your prerogative, but I think it leads to poor lighting practises which don't actually use the light settings properly (iray being physically based), and has also led to comments about images looking flat when there really is nothing at all wrong with the iray renderer. Still, whatever floats your boat, as they say, and I'll stick to gamma 1 ;)

  • ZarconDeeGrissomZarconDeeGrissom Posts: 5,412
    edited March 2015

    Jimbow said:
    zarcondeegrissom said:
    the "crush blacks" setting in the render tab under Iray is another as well. I prefer that at 0.0 instead of the default 0.2, and leave the Gama at default. For 3delight, I tried that Gama thing On, and ended up not being able to see anything in the view-field after adjusting the lights way back. So, no GC-on in my 3delight renders.

    It's certainly your prerogative, but I think it leads to poor lighting practises which don't actually use the light settings properly (iray being physically based), and has also led to comments about images looking flat when there really is nothing at all wrong with the iray renderer. Still, whatever floats your boat, as they say, and I'll stick to gamma 1 ;) Perhaps I was to firm sounding in what I was saying, lol. It is still early, and it takes hours for test renders in Iray.

    On the left is the NoGC 3delight render color cube, The render in progress is me still trying things out. With crush blacks at 0.2, the bottom end of that scale is pitch black, and it shouldn't be.
    (edit)
    I think your on to something, as all the mats we are messing with, are made for 3delight at the default Gama-off settings. Ignore Wachiwi-gone-red. Look at the background, the rocks, the shadow. Much better looking with Gama 1.0, and ISO doubled to compensate.

    IrayGCoff_001.png
    1610 x 1075 - 1M
    Gcoff3DL_Vs_IrayGCon_001.png
    1657 x 933 - 1M
    Post edited by ZarconDeeGrissom on
  • MBuschMBusch Posts: 547
    edited December 1969

    Male-M3dia said:
    MBusch said:
    2 more questions about Iray:

    1) I am missing a Fresnel parameter in Iray Uber Shader. Are there any plan to bring this layer effect to the base shader?


    Fresnel is one of the Top coat options I believe. It's in one of the drop downs (running a render so I can't check which one)

    User812 said:
    2 more questions about Iray: 1) I am missing a Fresnel parameter in Iray Uber Shader. Are there any plan to bring this layer effect to the base shader?

    Fresnel is one of the Top coat options I believe. It's in one of the drop downs (running a render so I can't check which one)

    You must set top coat value to greater than zero, then the options appear with the pull down for Fresnel.

    Thank you both! How can I miss that... I will take some coffee.

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 96,863
    edited December 1969

    zarcondeegrissom said:
    Vaskania said:
    zarcondeegrissom said:
    Speeking of Time... Can some one pleas translate this from the log file, to actual hours minutes and seconds?
    Total Rendering Time: 1 days -47.-96 seconds

    1 day
    47 minutes
    .96 seconds

    So, 24h 47m and less than 1s.

    At least that's what I'm getting from it.I'm fairly sure I didn't sleep that long, lol. Whatever it is, I would like to know, and it was under eight hours for sure.

    I think the report is just unreliable if the render crosses from one day to the next.

  • KeryaKerya Posts: 10,943
    edited December 1969

    Richard Haseltine said:
    zarcondeegrissom said:
    Vaskania said:
    zarcondeegrissom said:
    Speeking of Time... Can some one pleas translate this from the log file, to actual hours minutes and seconds?
    Total Rendering Time: 1 days -47.-96 seconds

    1 day
    47 minutes
    .96 seconds

    So, 24h 47m and less than 1s.

    At least that's what I'm getting from it.

    I'm fairly sure I didn't sleep that long, lol. Whatever it is, I would like to know, and it was under eight hours for sure.

    I think the report is just unreliable if the render crosses from one day to the next.

    During the witching hour all clocks are going wrong ... ;)

  • PschelfhPschelfh Posts: 261
    edited December 1969

    Kerya said:
    Richard Haseltine said:
    zarcondeegrissom said:
    Vaskania said:
    zarcondeegrissom said:
    Speeking of Time... Can some one pleas translate this from the log file, to actual hours minutes and seconds?
    Total Rendering Time: 1 days -47.-96 seconds

    1 day
    47 minutes
    .96 seconds

    So, 24h 47m and less than 1s.

    At least that's what I'm getting from it.

    I'm fairly sure I didn't sleep that long, lol. Whatever it is, I would like to know, and it was under eight hours for sure.

    I think the report is just unreliable if the render crosses from one day to the next.

    During the witching hour all clocks are going wrong ... ;)

    This weekend I did a render that took 47 minutes, but it also showed '1 day, 47 minutes'. I think the day gets added somewhere along 40 minutes...

    Peter.

  • MacSaversMacSavers Posts: 324
    edited December 1969

    timmins.william said:
    It's an investment, like learning anything. Personally, I had my doubts at first, but now... frankly, it's _easier_ to light a scene in Iray than in 3Delight.

    With Iray, I made a scene with a fireplace and a candle. Lighting it: make fire object (mage tower) an emitting object, set it to a cool temp like 2500 or so (I forget what I used, but it looked yellowish). Make candle, look up light bulb temperature... hey, candles are listed as 1900. Set candle flame emitter to that temperature.

    Increase luminance on both appropriately. Go to the render settings (tone control), put the main window on NVIDIA Iray (so I can see an accurate preview) and increase exposure until I start seeing the scene I want.

    Done.

    In 3delight, I'd be fiddling with spotlights, weird gels, maybe uberenvironment and tweaking a bunch of stuff. Or I'd use uberarealight to turn the same objects into lights. But then I'd probably still need uberenvironment to get the effect of light reflecting off countless surfaces and filling the room. Also, uberarealights are almost as slow as Iray.


    And as for time, don't assume. I am a stay at home dad with two 6 year olds, one of which is only in half day kindergarten. And I'm responsible for cleaning and housework.

    So I have MAYBE 2 hours a day free. Kinda.

    If I had 2 hours a day, that would be awesome. I have that in maybe a week. If lucky. Sometimes I go a few weeks in-between. It sucks, but what can you do.

    While I understand your comments, it doesn't take into account renders. Rendering time is on the order of 100x longer on some renders. Even my simplest renders are taking around 10 minutes. While they look great, I always seem to find something I missed after the render is complete no matter how much I try to catch everything. Perhaps it's my OCD, but I still tweak the scene. I've worked out my lighting systems pretty well on 3Delight and have presets I use with very little tweaking required. I can do a quick render in 3Delight and move and test. The Aux Window helps with that now, but since it's not showing the exact same thing as Iray lighting-wise, it will still take a render to see what's happening. Even waiting the 3+ minutes to see the first pixel showing up is over 6x longer than a full 3Delight render.

    Once I get a newer machine, I'll play with Iray some more. And I'm not saying I won't play with it at all, but for those of us with limited time and limited equipment, it will be when I take a vacation day... yeah, right. My last vacation was in 1988. Hah.

  • Oso3DOso3D Posts: 14,888
    edited December 1969

    Does the registered Dynamic Clothing plugin (with the physics and everything) work in 4.8 yet?

    Either it doesn't, or I can't figure out how to activate it. ;)

Sign In or Register to comment.