PDA

View Full Version : silly newbie questions about software


freedik
07-22-2003, 12:37 PM
1. Are there any alternative renderers for LW(not too expensive)?
LWs native rendering seems a "little" slow to me.
I've heard there is Brazil for MAX etc. but I don't even imagine how workflow with 3rd party renderer would be.

2. What software there is for camera calibrating, like Icarus was? I asked this a while ago but with no results. Come on, many of you must use something for this, could you just tell the programs name? I really don't have any clue. I know that Icarus went commercial under name PFTrack but there must be some other options. Also, it costs a fortune.

roguenroll
07-22-2003, 12:48 PM
realviz matchmover

23d boujou

I think both new after effects and the new premiere pro will have some feature, but won't as good as the two first ones.


r

freedik
07-22-2003, 01:04 PM
Thanks for the reply.

Matchmover doesn't seem to be discreets product, it's REALVIZ (http://www.realviz.com/products/mpro/index.php)

Costs 7499 / $ 7499 :eek:


They are not saying the price for boujou. Probably don't want to scare customers :P.

I'll check their tryout versions, thanks again.

roguenroll
07-22-2003, 01:14 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by freedik
[B]Thanks for the reply.

Matchmover doesn't seem to be discreets product, it's REALVIZ (http://www.realviz.com/products/mpro/index.php)

I corrected probably just before you posted. yeah there not cheap, and boujou from memory is a whole lot more $$$ than the realviz.

but there good at what they do.

roguenroll
07-22-2003, 01:20 PM
http://www.matchmove.com/matchmove_tools.html







and Im pretty sure this is the software that Icarus used to be, this company bought it and is working to sell this, not sure if its out yet. I think i'll probably not be as expen$ive as the others.

http://www.thepixelfarm.co.uk/pftrack_overview.html

freedik
07-22-2003, 01:36 PM
Yeah I metioned PFTrack at my first post. They had price on their web site a while ago, not any more. It was around 4k I think, not sure.

That's it about camera trackers. This www.matchmover.com site pretty much says all there is to say about it, thanks for the link.

So, are there any good rendering programs for Lightwave?

roguenroll
07-22-2003, 03:42 PM
well I think a possible way to go is one of the adobe apps, you'll have to read up but both have new versions out next month, and I think it is premiere pro.

But the good thing I read was that there will be a pretty decent upgrade on the tracking they use. The best part is they joined forces with 2D3 (boujou) for this new upgrade.

so this is looking to be a real cool addition.

lightwolf
07-22-2003, 04:23 PM
Originally posted by freedik
Yeah I metioned PFTrack at my first post. They had price on their web site a while ago, not any more. It was around 4k I think, not sure.
PTrack is out and costs around 3000, the render nodes (yep, network match moving :) ) should be 300 each.
However, it doesn't included the neat object re-creation functionality of Icarus, nor the automatic matte tool. All of the "neat" stuff that went beyond match moving is gone (and will be released later as separate products).
Cheer,
Mike

Steve Warner
07-22-2003, 04:31 PM
Originally posted by freedik

So, are there any good rendering programs for Lightwave?
Hi Freedik,

LightWave doesn't utilize external renderers like Max or Maya. Its own renderer is considered by many to be one of the best in the industry. Speed issues are relative. What renders slow on my work machine renders fast on my home machine, so saying the renderer is slow is a fairly subjective statement. Still, if you want to utilize an external renderer like Renderman, this set of plug-ins will let you do that:

http://www.flay.com/GetDetail.cfm?ID=1187

Cheers!

Steve

freedik
07-22-2003, 05:29 PM
Originally posted by Steve Warner
What renders slow on my work machine renders fast on my home machine, so saying the renderer is slow is a fairly subjective statement.

Err... How would you explain that? Don't tell me it depends on video card... does it?
I rendered a very primitive scene(not a single texture even) with one luminous cone primitive and it took 1-2 hours(with radiosity of course). So I was just wondering if there are any more efficient solutions for rendering. Yes, I've heard good words about LW renderer but still, doesn't hurt to ask. I hope :P

Rabid pitbull
07-22-2003, 05:38 PM
actually the video card doesn't have anything to do with the final render output. and yes radiosity is very sloooooow. you should search for it specifically here, many good threads explaining how to get good results fast.

good luck

Steve Warner
07-22-2003, 05:44 PM
Ahhh... Radiosity. That's the problem. It produces great images, but will kill your render times. I don't have any hard comparison sheets, but my understanding is that Radiosity times are excessively long no matter which renderer you use. So I don't think Max, Maya, Softimage, etc. have any advantage here.

Render times aren't dependant on your video card. But they are dependant on your processor. I have a 1.7 Gig P4 at work and a 2.53 Gig P4 at home. My home machine renders at twice the speed of my work machine. So a frame that takes 1 minute at work takes 30-seconds at home. But even the fastest machine will bog down when you turn on Radiosity.

My suggestion would be to turn down the number of Rays Per Evaluation, turn on Shading Noise Reduction, and lower the Ray Recursive limit in the Render Options panel.

You're going to suffer longer render times whenever you use Radiosity. If you need that Global Illumination look but can't afford the wait, you may want to look into Eki's Plug Pak. His Overcaster utilizes a spinning light trick that produces results similar to radiosity without the major render-time hit.

Hope this helps!

Steve

freedik
07-22-2003, 08:17 PM
Thank you Steve, your tips have been very helpful.
I didn't think that rendering has anything to do with videocard actually but there's still some voodoo in LW for me, that's why I asked just for checking.
For example, some people claim that it depends on video card how fast you can lasso select vertexes in LW modeller (dead slow on both my home and work comps, both 2.6 GHz). But thats another story.

Steve Warner
07-22-2003, 08:40 PM
Glad I could help. BTW, I just saw this post over on the NewTek forums:

http://vbulletin.newtek.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8348

It seems I was wrong about GI taking roughly the same amount of time to render regardless of the application. Not that this helps. If you're like me, you probably don't have $3000 to spend on Max just so you can render your scenes with Vray.

With regards to your video card, this will actually affect how you interact with the software. My 16MB Rage 128 Pro chokes on complex models. It makes modeling detailed objects a chore. But my 128MB Radeon 9700 Pro holds up quite well. But if you don't have $300 for a graphics card, don't despair. There are plenty of creative workarounds that will get you by. For example, in Modeler, you can lower your Patch Division setting to get better response in Sub-D mode. In Layout, try changing to a wireframe or bounding box mode for some of your viewports rather than using Shaded Solid in them all.

For what it's worth, I actually think that having limited hardware can strengthen your skills as a modeler/animator. Sure, it can be frustrating. But devising creative solutions can often result in a better workflow and quicker turnaround for your product. And when you do get better hardware, you'll only find yourself working faster. I see a lot of people trying to solve problems by throwing more money at it when they could get comparable results without the expense by investing a little more time. Some would argue that the software shouldn't require you to find workarounds. They may be right, but every software package has its limitations. Learning to problem solve is one of the hidden tricks of the trade, and will benefit you no matter what 3D package you use.

Cheers!

Steve

CGTalk Moderation
01-15-2006, 06:00 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.