Cycles now available


#86

RealFlow the app, not the plugin, correct? The latter got panned a bit for being half-baked / not stable after it came out. I haven’t heard anything to the contrary since. Unfortunately.


#87

No the plugin. It’s fine for simple stuff like this, quick and fluid (ho ho), the problems come when you move on from simple splashy stuff to trying to achieve specifics, like retiming, or remeshing cached sims. And the crashing is depressingly cross-platform.


#88

I get that it’s designed for small scale sims but the crashing you mentioned is what I was alluding to mostly. Hard to get things done if the thing is constantly crashing. Surprised they haven’t issued any statements or updates (AFAIK) — so far I haven’t read anything about a fix.


#89

how’s cycles going for you? still like it?

just purchased it so now trying to catch up on all the back posts about it… seems quiet for a bit from users about it…

anybody got some new tests to show? anyone using it in some types of production?

thanks,

dann


#90

nice! how’s it render on CPU vs the GPU? can you choose which when running in C4D? or does it default/grab GPU if it exists first?

thanks

dann


#91

I have it on Mac and so the AMD cards don’t help that much. I choose CPU and the render times are reasonable. I have done GPU renders but it’s a little flakey. For greater acceleration you need to be using Nvidia cards and CUDA. You can change how you want it to render so only GPU, only CPU or a mix of both. Also the interactive preview can be tuned to be either GPU, CPU or both.


#92

I’m currently a bit frustrated with inSydium’s licensing functionality. I purchased the 5-pack on a nice promo they offered, which should give me 8 nodes. Despite using just 6 I continually have problems with their system thinking I’m out of seats.


#93

They just posted this webinar for motion designers. Looking forward to hopefully learning some new tricks to get more out of Cycles on my trashcan.

https://vimeo.com/215809923


#94

Outstanding webinar.


#95

If you haven’t already done so you need to get in touch with our user support about this. We can’t resolve licensing issues in a forum but we can help sort out the problem if you contact us.

Steve


#96

I had some dialog w/your tech last week. They were quick to respond and helpful. We apparently entirely didn’t stamp out the issue. I’ll continue the dialog. Thanks for your post.


#97

Did anyone request for a demo recently?
I just did, and on the website it’s stated that the confirmation with link would be sent in a few minutes, but now its already a few hours.
And yes… I did check my spam :wink:

Regards, Robert


#98

We are currently updating our site and systems, once they are back online the registration will come through. It will be later today. Apologies for any inconvenience this may cause.


#99

No worries, I was just wondering if I made a mistake somewhere…

Many thanks :slight_smile:


#100

Is there any hope for fully supported AMD/Open CL rendering coming to cycles 4d? I might be wrong, but I think Open CL rendering in blender is now feature complete.

Really my main hope is being able to simultaneously use the internal AMD GPU (on the iMac my company just bought) along with an eGPU box in the future. I’d love to make use of the internal RX580 and hope it isn’t dead weight.


#101

So how does Cycles in C4D compare to AMD ProRender in terms of rendering speed?

I tried Cycles in Bforartists and ProRender in R19 Demo. Cycles seemed a bit faster on the crappy GTX 850M GPU I tested on.

Of course ProRender is new and not yet optimized. AMD may squeeze a lot more speed out of it in the future.


#102

The 2.79 update made a lot of improvments to OpenCL in Blender / Cycles, and I believe that specific version was included in the most recent Cycles4D update this past summer. Really the answer to “is there hope” just depends on how much more the Blender people do with Cycles but what is it that OpenCL supports as a technology that Cycles4D doesn’t that you’re looking for?. I think it’s pretty close to parity with the CUDA implementation at this point but I could be wrong.

A different question might be: are the specific GPUs you want to use, supported by Cycles… that I don’t know.


#103

Thanks for the info, i’m new to this 3d world can anyone please tell me how’s this better than the render come as default with c4d? Thanks


#104

I guess my confusion comes in comparing the Blender Cycles documentation to the cycles 4d documentation (which doesn’t mention R19). On the blender site, they say that current AMD cards are supported, including the RX580 in the iMac (they don’t mention the iMac, only the AMD card). On the Cycles 4d documentation, it mentions that Apple’sOpen CL driver has issues and Cycles 4d may crash on a Mac running AMD hardware because of it. They suggest trying it out, and to use CPU rendering as a fallback.

Add to that nVidia Apple driver has an open CL bug when it comes to R19’s ProRender. The Mac is really stuck in that weird place hoping for the stars to align.

Ah, the joys of being a Mac user! This system is no nice and stable otherwise. :wink:


#105

c4d has diferent renderers on board. standard, physical and now in R19 prorender.
Standard and physical are CPU based. prorender and cycles GPU. and besides that standard and physical have the deepest interation in cinema 4d, this is the main difference.
you can finde a lot of info about cpu vrs. GPU rendering in the net.