Pixar's OpenSubDiv enters open beta

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08 August 2012   #16
OH MY GOD! This is what I wanted for so long. I need this in maya yesterday.
 
Old 08 August 2012   #17
Originally Posted by SheepFactory: OH MY GOD! This is what I wanted for so long. I need this in maya yesterday.

Hehe, we needed this for years and years.
I predicted something similar http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=2&t=904053
 
Old 08 August 2012   #18
Originally Posted by DePaint: Anyone know what is different about Pixar SubDiv surfaces, versus regular SubDs?

Is it the fact that Pixar SubDs run at 50 FPS on a GPU, or is there an aesthetic/visual difference as well?



Sounded to me like speed was the primary difference. Massive speed improvement by using the GPU to calculate the subdivisions and vertex translations
 
Old 08 August 2012   #19
Originally Posted by sentry66: Sounded to me like speed was the primary difference. Massive speed improvement by using the GPU to calculate the subdivisions and vertex translations


Yup. Huge speed difference between calculating this on the GPU vs the CPU with current subdivision/smooth mesh algorithms.
__________________
My opinions do not represent those of my employer.
 
Old 08 August 2012   #20
I have to wonder how this will impact CPU rendering. Are renderfarms soon going to benefit from having strong GPU's, even for traditional CPU based rendering? Or maybe on board integrated GPU's will be enough to have a dramatic speed boost.
 
Old 08 August 2012   #21
didnt they create their subdivs for a micropolygon renderer? if you use the crease function you need to subdivide a lot times.

how would this work in raytracers? vray or arnold?
 
Old 08 August 2012   #22
is it still as fast on a fully rigged character with deformers and muscles and such? would it be just like animating joints? that would be super awesome.
__________________
 
Old 08 August 2012   #23
I suspect maya's and other program's own deformer bottlenecks will still come into play for complex rigged characters/objects. This mainly just means animators get to animate the actual character geometry and not a low res proxy version of it.
 
Old 08 August 2012   #24
Red face they are in talks

Originally Posted by DanielWray: Anyway, It will be nice to see this in commercial software (I can't imagine Blender getting it due to the licensing conflicts. Sad.)


I subscribe to blender developers mailing list. They are in talks. With more conversation will be held after Siggraph (what they said back then).

Don't know what is the result would be though...
 
Old 08 August 2012   #25
Isnt tha the point of Pixar giving it away for free so even Blender can integrate it?
 
Old 08 August 2012   #26
Luxology was licensing some Pixar Sub-D tech i wonder how different this is to what they have already licensed and implemented?
__________________
Vizual-Element | Automotive Superstore
 
Old 08 August 2012   #27
Wink licensing model

Originally Posted by Anchang-Style: Isnt tha the point of Pixar giving it away for free so even Blender can integrate it?


The licensing is the problem. Only source codes that compatible with GPL 3 (or whatever blender code falls in, to busy to check) can be integrated.

And the problem right now is that its not compatible, yet.

EDIT: Wait, why are you asking this? DanielWray already mentioned it - licensing conflict.
 
Old 08 August 2012   #28
Originally Posted by ice-boy: didnt they create their subdivs for a micropolygon renderer? if you use the crease function you need to subdivide a lot times.

how would this work in raytracers? vray or arnold?


If they subdivide and displace it before its sent to the renderer then id suspect it wont give any/much slow downs, but you'll need quite some memory for heavy sudivided meshes.

Last edited by CHRiTTeR : 08 August 2012 at 02:14 AM.
 
Old 08 August 2012   #29
Originally Posted by DePaint: Anyone know what is different about Pixar SubDiv surfaces, versus regular SubDs?

Is it the fact that Pixar SubDs run at 50 FPS on a GPU, or is there an aesthetic/visual difference as well?


The main difference between Pixar SubDs and other implementations is in the way that it subdivides the geometry - both in terms of geometry and UVs. Pixar has patents on it's method of subdividing geo, which has resulted in major inconsistencies in dealing with subdivision surfaces in a CG pipeline as other developers can't match the method used by Pixar.

So Maya, Max, Softimage, etc will all produce subdivided geo in it's own unique way, Mudbox and Zbrush will both do something else and none will match what Pixar's PRMan does or what any other renderer (mental ray, vray, etc) will do. The renderer is the most important part in this equation as it's output is what you see on-screen.

On top of this, not all software applications support the same SubD features. I remember a while back we wanted to use creases on SubD surfaces - the benefits were obvious as it meant you didn't have to spend time cutting and adjusting additional edges to produce nice looking hard-surface objects - also less geometry made rigging and rendering quicker. Now Maya did support creases and it was easy to visualise the creasing effect inside Maya and transfer that info to the renderer and get approximate results. The problem was neither ZBrush, Mudbox or Cyslice supported creases, so it meant that we couldn't sculpt or extract displacement from those objects. This meant we were back to cutting additional edges into our models.

I've only seen one VFX studio deal with this correctly and not through artistic hacks - it did so by implementing it's own SubD library (edit*) which allowed it to match Pixar's method of subdividing geo. That way it didn't matter what software application you did the subdivision in, the results would be identical to that of the renderer.

A few practical benefits of this were - better representation of model inside Maya when modelling, rendered hair/fur didn't appear floating above the skin as the fur was generated from the same limit surface. Textures didn't show any artifacts (distortion, seams) as texture artists were painting on geometry and UVs which matched those of the renderer.

The fast GPU implementation and SubD features (creases, etc) presented here are certainly cool pluses - but it's not the main reason why this is good news - the winner on the day here is pipeline consistency.

*edit. I had assumed the base subdivision method was patented as well, hence the reason no one was implementing it fully, but after reading Neil's essay (see later in thread) and further googling it seems that only some of the bonus features are patented. Some companies have just been slack in not implementing the original method fully.

Last edited by earlyworm : 08 August 2012 at 02:16 PM.
 
Old 08 August 2012   #30
As fable fox has mentioned, the issues are being worked on.

Apparently Pixar have been very responsive to the Blender developers. This is good news, and I hope a solution can be found
__________________
I dabble...
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.