Arnold for Cinema!!!

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
  06 June 2013
Arnold for Cinema!!!

Have you guys seen that?

http://neosushi68.tumblr.com/post/5...rnoldrender-for

 
  06 June 2013
"I'll be back!"
 
  06 June 2013
Nice screenshot, great news, it's exciting to see these high-end options blooming.

I know it's a beta etc, but down in the bottom left corner... 5hours 42minutes
__________________
ProSite | Behance | Twitter
- - - - - -
Freelancer using Cinema4D? Sign up to the freelance directory: C4DFreelancers.com
 
  06 June 2013
Hmmm.

While I think it's great that yet another render engine is coming to C4D, I wonder what effect Arnold will really have.

I've worked in a studio where Arnold has been in use for roughly 3 years. This was to render from XSI. They had originally moved to Arnold for its ability to handle very large data sets - massive creature animations with nearly all the detail in the geometry as opposed to subdividing/displacing at render time.

Here are some things I noticed:

Arnold has been in Beta this entire time. A full release may be imminent (it may even be out) but during the time I saw it in use it never reached 1.0

Arnold was only available to studios and as far as I could see its price was always negotiable.

Arnold requires licenses for every node. I know this is normal, but as a C4D user I'm used to getting a lot of render nodes for little/no extra cost. I think the normal studio model is to use watermarked versions for the artists and put all the licenses on the farm.

Arnold produced fantastic results, but this required a lot of work mainly from dedicated TDs. And the render times could be very, very long.

Now all this stuff is probably nothing new to a studio doing VFX or character animation. And perhaps the availability of Arnold will be yet another reason for bigger studios to consider C4D on bigger jobs.

But personally I'm not really dying to get my hands on Arnold.

It's main benefit is to handle very heavy geometry. Well, as it stands C4D can't cope with highly detailed scenes as it is. Of course I hope this changes.

It's probably going to be much more expensive, especially to run on a farm. AR and Vray look like they will both have very reasonable multiple-node licenses for a while to come. And as a small business I can't stand the idea that the cost of a render license can vary depending on how good a deal a studio can land. If I buy a Vray license for x amount I want to know that my competitors are paying the same.

So I'm pretty happy with the results I'm getting out of AR and Vray right now. The Arnold results I've seen have only been better when a genuinely talented lighter/shader is working his/her magic. And I'd bet they'd get the same out of Vray if they were as skilled with it. The main stumbling block with texturing in C4D is the material editor. The XSI guys have a beautiful shading tree based (I think) on ICE and looking just like Xpresso. But unless I'm missing something the Arnold bridge will still use the C4D texturing paradigm.

And while it might not suit a large studio, I'm looking forward to the realtime and DR options that should be coming from Vray soon.

W
__________________
My portfolio site

@WillMacNeil_VFX
 
  06 June 2013
Originally Posted by ChrisCousins: I know it's a beta etc, but down in the bottom left corner... 5hours 42minutes


nothing to do with beta, its already running full throttle and fine. I just left it cooking on two threads of my older machine...

I wouldn't comment on the Arnold render engine itself, but rather on the integration here.

(Just so much: Arnold is blazingly fast if set up correctly and thats quite an easy job I would say)

Originally Posted by Kokosing: It's main benefit is to handle very heavy geometry.


For some Arnold has many more benefits then, I guess.

Last edited by uglykids : 06 June 2013 at 09:45 PM.
 
  06 June 2013
Originally Posted by uglykids: nothing to do with beta, its already running full throttle and fine. I just left it cooking on two threads of my older machine...

I wouldn't comment on the Arnold render engine itself, but rather on the integration here.

(Just so much: Arnold is blazingly fast if set up correctly and thats quite an easy job I would say)



For some Arnold has many more benefits then, I guess.


Arnold's not as fast as a lot of people are expecting especially coming from a Vray environment. The thing is renders like Vray have several different options for how they want to calculate and bias things. Arnold's a much more brute force system, which makes it a great iteration renderer, and as already mentioned it is a brilliantly efficient memory handler for a raytracer but I also agree that this renderer will not be an ideal option for most C4D users. Strangely Solid Angle felt the same when I initially approached them about developing a C4D version, I'm curious as to what changed since then that they are allowing it now.

btw, 2 cores does make it sound better but one also has to acknowledge that the render posted is still not production final worthy with the current amount of grain. This is the one challenge I've experienced so far with Arnold and that i know a lot of lighters at Sony deal with, is that the largest amount of time spent by the artist is finding the balance in grain versus time. getting an approved lighting to a final render can escalate rendertimes hours if not tens of hours. This isn't a diss at Arnold specifically, physically based renderers with more brute force methods for GI and soon SSS (I say this as their documentation states they will be dropping the SSS cache method for soley the direct sampling method in the future, fewer limitations but it's always slower than the cache method) etc simply lead to this. We are encountering the same challenges as we head this way with our proprietary renderer, we see the same is Mantra's PBR, and C4D's physical renderer with QMC. I"d definitely say that its generally better than most of these, but it' has far fewer alternative options compared to these other renderers to use more biased and interpolating methods for things, the SSS being a prime example where they want to scrap an interpolated caching method.
__________________
Quote: "Until you do what you believe in, how do you know whether you believe in it or not?" -Leo Tolstoy
Kai Pedersen
 
  06 June 2013
Quote: Strangely Solid Angle felt the same when I initially approached them about developing a C4D version, I'm curious as to what changed since then that they are allowing it now.

I wrote them too. But there is not their project(arnold for c4d)
 
  06 June 2013
This is in no way initiated by Solid Angle. Yet why should they disallow third-party development. I experienced friendly and thouroughly support so far, impressive to me as they are still small and limited in staff. Of course they need to focus on different issues rather than Cinema 4D support but that is taken care of

Arnold surely isn't reasonable to use for everyone. One of the initial goals was to enable Cinema 4D users to work with arnold natively and not be bound to XSI/Maya.. (Houdini and 3DsMax connections surfaced later actually).

Having this option might also enlarge the userbase, especially in several pro segments where Cinema 4D is only known as a motion-graphics oriented application.

Coming from Maxwell Render, I personally admire the approach Arnold takes.
 
  06 June 2013
Originally Posted by uglykids: This is in no way initiated by Solid Angle. Yet why should they disallow third-party development. I experienced friendly and thouroughly support so far, impressive to me as they are still small and limited in staff. Of course they need to focus on different issues rather than Cinema 4D support but that is taken care of

Arnold surely isn't reasonable to use for everyone. One of the initial goals was to enable Cinema 4D users to work with arnold natively and not be bound to XSI/Maya.. (Houdini and 3DsMax connections surfaced later actually).

Having this option might also enlarge the userbase, especially in several pro segments where Cinema 4D is only known as a motion-graphics oriented application.

Coming from Maxwell Render, I personally admire the approach Arnold takes.



I offered money resources and knowledge base and said I'd recruit developers, much like Stefan did with Vray, but only received disinterest. Even Yannich who now works for Maxon wasn't interested despite his growing interest in C4D. Guess a lot changes in 2 years, although looking at the work already done I'm guessing it's been in development for a fairly long time now. Maybe it was my lack of a direct line to Marcos, sure regret not being allowed to attend his presentation at Rhythm.

I wouldn't expect it to enlarge the userbase too much rather improve the output and complexity of some of the userbase that are struggling with the limits of C4D's renderer or perhaps even Vray (though I doubt that one as much) (guess I can also see maxwell/fry/octane/indigo type users jumping to arnold if they can afford it)

As stated before a large benefit especially at these types of price points in how much the renderer can handle and typically it's not C4D's renderer that is the bottle neck in terms of scene complexity but C4D itself. Xparticles is a prime example of that. Don't get me wrong proper physically plausible shaders is another great benefit of arnold as is it's speed compared to physical renderer, but Vray offers much of that too.
__________________
Quote: "Until you do what you believe in, how do you know whether you believe in it or not?" -Leo Tolstoy
Kai Pedersen
 
  07 July 2013
Originally Posted by LucentDreams: Arnold's not as fast as a lot of people are expecting especially coming from a Vray environment. The thing is renders like Vray have several different options for how they want to calculate and bias things. Arnold's a much more brute force system, which makes it a great iteration renderer, and as already mentioned it is a brilliantly efficient memory handler for a raytracer but I also agree that this renderer will not be an ideal option for most C4D users. Strangely Solid Angle felt the same when I initially approached them about developing a C4D version, I'm curious as to what changed since then that they are allowing it now.

I wonder about phenomena which made by Corona renderer at several Russian forums(archiviz mostly). Most vray-users switch to this AVX/Embree-based (un)biased renderer.
But if "arni" will have ple or early bird version and more interesting pricing...i think most of will to switch it.
 
  09 September 2013
We used C4DtoA for the intro in this Clip:

First 24 seconds except for the Volumetrics which are Turbulence FDs native Rendering.

Wacom Intuos Pro

Last edited by uglykids : 09 September 2013 at 07:59 PM.
 
  09 September 2013
Beautiful. Great work.
 
  09 September 2013
Thread automatically closed

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.
__________________
CGTalk Policy/Legalities
Note that as CGTalk Members, you agree to the terms and conditions of using this website.
 
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 02:14 AM.


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