hahah either Apple made their laptop Vista-friendly (highly doubt that considering how horribly Quicktime and Itunes works in Windows vs OSX) or Vista finally matured with the right drivers backing it. Either way, it’s a good alternative.
Try out the ctrl-studio stuff regardless. They have helped out the MR community despite any quabbles Francesca had with the CGtalk staff here a long while ago. Most of their stuff should be on mymentalray.com ROCK ON FRANNIE!!!
It’s not ignorant. I have a couple Valid points. I have Vista and have used it plenty. It’s not so much the performance, it’s that Windows has a crapper load of processes that need my administration access o.k.'d. Now this would seem like a good thing rather than a flaw but I have encountered several tasks that won’t let me do what I want even WITH administrative rights that I set up for myself. I once had to do some crazy Command Prompt stuff just to get a video game to run properly.
Also, Windows has to consume an EXTRA gig of ram just to run properly in dual boot. I generally want to keep all the ram I can when working with 3D applications, especially with particles and fluids, since your scene is stored in ram upon the loading of your file.
The main point, though, is that I don’t want to deal with viruses. Sounds stupid, but when you life and lively hood are dependent on a small box inside your computer, you’d generally want to protect that as much as possible. I know people that get viruses with Norton installed and properly updated. Not good.
Maybe faster but not a better experience. OS X as an operating system is much less frustrating than Windows and I’d rival your comment with benchmark tests because of the ram issue. I also do a lot of other work on the OS X only side and I need to reserve as much hard drive space as possible. But I never know how much I’ll actually need yet Windows has to have a dedicated amount, especially if I’m rendering.
Don’t tell someone they are ignorant because of a preference. I respect your opinion but disagree. Good day to you sir
Dear Spiralo,
In the the thread links I have provided you, there are all the INFO you are looking for…!
Anyway, IMPORTONS can be used with FG/GI, but IP (IRRADIANCE PARTICLES) will be automatically disabled.
Or you can use IMPORTONS with IP, but FG must be disabled.
I guess that user by “IRR” means IRRADIANCE PARTICLES, but IP+IRR doesn’t make sense.
IMPORTONS+IP make sense…!
And again, to expose the IMPORTONS & IP settings with previous version of Maya, you was forced to use CTRL_GHOST SHADER , but with Maya 2009 DON"T NEED CTRL GHOST ANYMORE…!
Ciao
Alex
Good news can mean more than one thing.
Easier = Good News
More Sophistication = Good News
While not always true, Maya generally attracts users that are pushing the envelope. The upside is that Maya is very sophisticated, the down side is it can be hard to use. If you don’t want to push the envelope there are tons of great 3D packages that are easier to use. I have used Lightwave, Max, and C4D. They are all easier to use and very good. I would recommend you try them.
I for one, will stick with Maya.
please don’t stray from the topic folks. This is about irradiance particles and importons. If you want to talk about Mental Ray vs. Maxwell make your own thread or go to the Maxwell forums. If you are generally trolling then we won’t miss you.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooh
Yaaaay does no foreign shader dance
Thank you!
The point was cgbeige wanted to clutter up the MR threads with Maxwell trolling. Someone else pointed out he should look at other packages and I commented on how Maxwell works with those other packages.
You already found the answer you were looking for, so by responding afterwards with this is pretty moot, no? So yes, we’ll keep it on topic (this would probably exclude responses about dancing and things of that nature).
Thanks for all the information. I’m glad to see that after so many years this section of the forum still has so much activity from all the old proffesionals.
But about this importon and IP thing. One problem of mine was never resolved in the last thread, which still makes me very hesitant to invest any more time in it until it’s further developed (was gonna wait till 2010 to come back to importons)
first, go to this page http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=87&t=621727&page=22&pp=15
then read my posts starting about half way down.
Then read ctrl.studios post at the very bottom.
The issue was basically that, it does not accurately bounce light around corners. In interior scenes this was negligible, as it didn’t have to take into account light from every angle to produce adequate results, but I’m sure it still has issues.
I’m still suspecting that any sort of improvment into contrast or ‘vibrance’ of an image with importons/IP is really due to the fact it’s not taking into account every light bounce and is artifically darkening areas. I mean, final gathering has the ability to be every bit as accurate and detailed as IP/importons, that is if you turn up the settings and wait a bit more time. So it’s not like there is some inherit more ‘vibrant’ component to the ip/importon algorithm, changes in color and contrast is due to it bouncing the light differently. And as I understand, final gathering with very high settings is the current benchmark for accuracy in mental ray, so if importons are coming out different or darker in more areas, more contrasted, it’s not because of more accuracy or improvement over final gathering, it’s because of error, it’s missing bounces.
Or am I completely wrong there?
Admittedly, I have not done new tests since the lasts tests in that old thread. But I’ve seen no mention of any changes to the algorithm in the recent service packs, so I’ve not taken the time to retry it. So I am just curious, has anyone run into anything about this issue? Or looked into it a little more?
I just transferred my entire system and applications in one step flawlessly to a RAID array with all applications working with custom libraries intact (and no third party software or boot disks), I’m previewing 32-bit HDR and RAW files in the OS X Finder (Vista can’t even preview .CR2 files), running a Unix command line and have never seen this Mac Pro crash. I’m using keywords and Spotlight to work faster with textures:
I could do the same with fonts and get a full preview of the typeface right there.
So I’m wondering how it is you claim that Vista is a better experience. Vista is a better experience for people who have no idea how to use the Mac (Exposé, menu bar proxies, drag and drop into open/save dialogs, etc). There may be more 3D apps for Windows but that’s about it. I think you better tell the editor of CGSociety Paul Hellard why he’s wrong when he said this to me in an email (when I pitched him an article about free 3D workflow tweaks for the Mac):
Gee, you’re talking to the right man here. I’m an OS X user to the
point of wondering why anyone would waste time on any other platform.
But I'll take the word of a guy who trolls all Mac-related threads over his any day. Or maybe I should take the word of Microsoft, who has so much confidence in the abilities of Vista that they are scratching all references to it and giving away Windows 7 for free.
edit: it doesn't bother you that the Mac side of your MacBook Pro's 3D hardware is supported by Autodesk but the Vista side isn't? So what part of this experience is better again?Relax, we all know MacOS is good.
Its just that some of us spend very little time using the OS for anything other than hosting our primary application. I for one, spend a very small portion of my day doing anything other than clicking in Maya. With a couple easy tweaks Vista has excellent network performance, disk performance, graphics performance, and 64bit support. Thats 98% of what I care about.
I come from the IRIX and Linux world originally and I hate Microsoft. That doesn’t change the fact that Vista runs Maya very well.
sorry guys but rygoody posted a really good question regarding the initial thread topic of Importons and irradiance particles, something i would also like to know the answer too, and cgbeige you have just replied with non related crap. Go write it somewhere else. (cool set up tho. Thought i would lighten the mood lol) If you wanna reply to this then PM me. Don’t fill this thread with non related comments.
@Dagon @withego Is there any news on whether mental images are improving the importon/ IP workflow/algorithms?
Cheers
Rich
http://photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00BAi4
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=47306
http://www.hardcoreware.net/view-cr2-files-in-64-bit-windows-vista-and-xp/
http://www.hardcoreware.net/canon-raw-cr2-thumbnail-support-in-vista/
http://www.difiapro.com/cr2_viewer.html
Canon is showing no sign of ever making 64-bit drivers.
They have already fixed this. Done.
I don’t believe this is a MS issue. Much like Photoshop not being 64-bit on your computer, CGBeige… Please do your research before posting unfacts.
lol - third party software is needed to see the files at all (I was talking about how you can preview RAW and HDR files right in the Finder without any additional software):
that also works in open dialogs so you can see what HDR file you are importing for an IBL probe.
Okay, so how about HDR files previewed in Explorer by default? anyway, I won’t derail this thread anymore - I was just responding to a retarded blanket statement that needed to be refuted.
Hate to derail a thread, but evidently you missed the evidence, Mr. Beige.
http://www.hardcoreware.net/canon-raw-cr2-thumbnail-support-in-vista/
There it is. RAW in Vista. .dll files aren’t “third party software”, if drivers are considered “third party” then every driver in your computer is “third party”, since Apple doesn’t manufacture any of that software or hardware. Do you believe your hard drive was made by Apple with drivers written by Apple? Canon also made the RAW driver files for the Mac, in case you weren’t aware.
Also, regarding HDR… Do you just have a rough time using Google? Came right up. Your Vista install didn’t have an updated Direct X, evidently, CGBeige. Please update your computers before making claims about things not working & software elitism in general.
http://www.cgarchitect.com/vb/35034-there-way-view-hdrs-thumbnails-windows-explorer.html
Re: Is there a way to view HDR’s as thumbnails in Windows Explorer? The new version of the Direct X SDK seems to include HDR support for Windows explorer. I’m downloading it at the moment and will report back once I’ve tested it.
Followed by:
Re: Is there a way to view HDR’s as thumbnails in Windows Explorer? Okay, tried it and it works a treat. A little slower but considering it’s processing 32-bit images on-the-fly what do you expect. If the slight speed decrease bothers you then go with the option suggested previously and save a jpeg version of each HDR in the same folder.
Seems pretty obvious your experience with Vista is very biased and perhaps it’s just too complex. No more from me here, though. Re-railing thread.
If Importons/IP don’t accurately bounce light, are they simply workarounds for using GI and/or FG? I’ve never been able to get either (Importons & IP, that is) to work properly, but in my quick-deadline workflow I have little time to experiment; high turnarounds demand medium-quality renders at best, and the only reason to switch to Importons/IP for me would be if they sped up my workflow itself, as render times are already decent with GI and sometimes GI+FG. Are these features just not very well implemented in MR for Maya yet? What about physical accuracy?
My initial understanding was that irridance particles were to compete with Vray irridance particles. As in being, the one click ultimate solution to all GI, a replacement for FG, but better.
But given there current state of the function, I suspect there still being developed. Autodesk just put them in there for people who want to expiriment right now.
and is there anyway to turn on the image caching framebuffer in maya 2009 without ctrl_ghost?
Apple doesn’t manufacture any of that software or hardware.
Google “Aperture review.” Mine is at the top - I know how RAW works in OS X and actually, yes, it is Apple that writes the RAW decoder for Canon files, much like any other 3rd party RAW decoder.
I’ll stop derailing the thread when people stop writing misinformation that needs correcting.
Ya man. Can’t have disinformation. Might lose some OS X converts and you know Jobs wouldn’t like that.
This thread is fast becoming diluted once again unfortunately. I still want to know the pros and cons about IP and Importons. Appears to me that GI and FG are still kings perhaps not as fast, but in any case I wont have to learn how to use the newer technology…for now