Why is Arnold Render not publicly available?

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 11 November 2012   #16
m0z, how it is in comparison with Vray? Motion blur, DOF, blurry reflections, displacement speed?
 
Old 11 November 2012   #17
Originally Posted by DePaint:
Wake me when the Solid Angle people have learned how to create a website for their product...


only if you promise to stay asleep till then
__________________
Over one hundred polygons
 
Old 11 November 2012   #18
It's more like $4500, but you can put it on 5 computers...
 
Old 11 November 2012   #19
no the thing is, that at the current state they don't feel that it's ready for the public. I mean we're at version 0.20! I guess 1.0 will be the first official release... but it's a long way still.

It's perfectly usable in production right now though.

I understand them to be honest. They want to give the best support to these studios that bought licenses. If thousands of studios would buy licenses the support would suffer for all of them because the Solid Angle team just isn't so big! With trial versions they would get hundreds of mails every week about this and that, one has to deal with that bureaucratic bs.

When the time's right, they'll make it public. Until then, deal with it I guess....

Originally Posted by mister3d: m0z, how it is in comparison with Vray? Motion blur, DOF, blurry reflections, displacement speed?


Displacement is insanely fast! You get Motion Blur and DOF "for free". The speed doesn't really suffer. But you'll need more AA samples for smooth images (duh). The lens features in Vray are cooler right now, a "bias" switch for the bokeh effect is missing in Arnold for Maya (yet?). But to be honest, in most of our shots here we do it in post with Lenscare. Reelsmart for Motion Blur because we usually need the flexibility - except some complicated shots with lots of stuff going on. Then the Motion Blur in Arnold is sweet!

Blurry reflections aren't a problem either... like I said, you don't have much bars to tweak the quality - but you have to know what you're doing of course. Rendertimes can climb up fast if one uses Arnold not the way it's meant to be.

For interior scenes I'd never use it to be honest because - like Bitter told me, it is a uni-directional path tracer, which makes it harder to find light sources. It's the perfect renderer for exterior shots though! Dome light, directional light - bam.
__________________
mathiasmarkovits[dot]com

Last edited by m0z : 11 November 2012 at 08:34 PM.
 
Old 11 November 2012   #20
Originally Posted by DePaint:
This smells like a shitty marketing-stunt to me... Pretending that their renderer is "really exclusive" or "really special" or something.



Why? The people you read about saying how good it is it's not them. The only one pretending right here is you, stop acting like if you were the special one and use that crappy email to ask everything you want.
__________________
numbers and more numbers.
 
Old 11 November 2012   #21
I sent them an email, they sent me Arnold, wasn't hard. It's still in beta.
 
Old 11 November 2012   #22
any news if they are thinking about 3ds max?
 
Old 11 November 2012   #23
Originally Posted by m0z: For interior scenes I'd never use it to be honest because - like Bitter told me, it is a uni-directional path tracer, which makes it harder to find light sources. It's the perfect renderer for exterior shots though! Dome light, directional light - bam.


Yep it's much slower for interior scenes but it's not unusable, and as I understood they are constantly working on improving stuff.

As I heard many big studios bought licenses and are implementing it into their pipeline, one of the reasons I guess why the price for PRMan went down.
As I understood Digic used Arnold for Mass Effect http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcZB0GTdBdc
__________________
www.inbitwin.com

Last edited by LuckyBug : 11 November 2012 at 10:13 PM.
 
Old 11 November 2012   #24
check out their Halo 4 cinematic from the main menu*, also Arnold.
And Sony's "Hotel Transylvania" is also done with Arnold. Pretty awesome...

I'd love to use Arnold more for interior shots. I used it already but it certainly takes some time to get noise free (almost)...
__________________
mathiasmarkovits[dot]com
 
Old 11 November 2012   #25
Originally Posted by ndeboar: I sent them an email, they sent me Arnold, wasn't hard. It's still in beta.

what do they send you. SDK, render engine to import files....
 
Old 11 November 2012   #26
The thing I love the most about Arnold is how simple it is to use. It doesn't take long to get results and you don't have a ton of parameters to tweak like you do in MR.
 
Old 11 November 2012   #27
that's true.
as Arnold founder Marcos Fajardo pointed out at Siggraph 2010 final render CPU time might cost $0.10 per hour, but artist time is closer to $40 an hour, so interactivity is also vital.


-> http://www.fxguide.com/featured/the-art-of-rendering/

very good article!
__________________
mathiasmarkovits[dot]com
 
Old 11 November 2012   #28
Originally Posted by DePaint: This smells like a shitty marketing-stunt to me... Pretending that their renderer is "really exclusive" or "really special" or something.

Ever the positive person...
Very simply, Marcos has decided he wants to target a specific market and userbase for Arnold, and maintain core values such as support to a certain level.

To do that, he's chosen to not go scattershot to then find himself and his team painted in a corner and having to change into something he doesn't want to meet expectations (his and his clients').

You're too used to the massively commercialised and commoditised, low cost Adobe and AD policies, while Solid Angle wishes to retain more of a boutique style for longer.
For quite a while 3Delight was doing the same thing.

It's doing well and it has a fairly happy and satisfied userbase that feels well tended for, so it's not a shitty marketing technique, it's a good support technique and a mean to retain company and product identity and not become another crappy, aimless, confused and ill-featured engine like some other raytracer out there.
__________________
Come, Join the Cult http://www.cultofrig.com - Rigging from First Principles
 
Old 11 November 2012   #29
confused and ill-featured engine like some other raytracer out there


Which shall remain unnamed
__________________
http://gustavoeb.com.br/blog/
 
Old 11 November 2012   #30
Originally Posted by m0z: I think it was like 900 per license. But Solid Angle doesn't differentiate between render and interactive licenses... You have to pay that price either way. So we have 5 interactive/batch licenses here..


Does that mean you have to pay for render node license?

If that's the case, that's pricey.
 
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 01:03 PM.


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