Solid Angle Arnold goes live - C4DtoA Information Thread


#1

Hey there, this is Daniel from Ugly Kids.

As some of you might have seen during the last months, we have been working on a sophisticated bridge to support the Arnold Render engine inside Cinema 4D.

Today Solid Angle lifted the curtains and finally opens up the access to Arnold:

https://www.solidangle.com/

We are very excited about this step from Solid Angle, and our C4DtoA plugin is working pretty good already, we support Windows and OSX btw.
I will use this thread to keep you updated on the progress, state and give feedback on your input and questions.

Cheers

Daniel

www.uglykids.org


#2

Hello Daniel
Thats nice! Hope it will not have same “road-show” and end of TB Krakatoa “free” port.

Daniel, i just dowload sdk, have you support extensions as fluid dynamics(i saw your test with xp and tfd), navie effex?!
And shader extensions as custom pyAPI-based?


#3

please keep us updated with your news :thumbsup:


#4

Some screens from several tests during development and production with C4DtoA.

Don’t mind the quality or sampling levels, these were quick tests mainly to check on different issues/feature implementations and proper value transformations.


#5

Hi Daniel,
one question. How fast is it compared to C4D physical or Vray?
Just a ballpark… same, faster, slower, would do.
Thanks


#6

I heard it eats buckets like pac-man, nice to see such progress Daniel, keep it up


#7

Athanasios, its a bit difficult to answer this question in short, but I will try to be as “unbiased” (literally) as possible: Arnold can be faster than Physical or Vray in many situations, not only considering the actual render performance but also the quite easy and convenient way to actually setup and tweak scenes.

However, due to the physical based and “brute force” nature of Arnold, there are cases where either Physical or Vray have their strike, especially when you can rule out certain accuracy in GI, overall physical plausible behaviour and such.

There will be other opinions, depending on personal experiences and expectations which vary greatly.

On a side-note, there certainly is a reason for so many people/companies/productions/agencies switching to Arnold in the blink of an eye.

Thanks, Sandi, yet this pac-man doesn’t grow fat and gets slower, whatever you feed him;)


#8

I’m sure they’d do it for the quality, but it’s good to know it’s fast where it needs to be :slight_smile:
thanks for the reply Daniel and keep up the great job.


#9

I read at several forums, mostly russian, that redshift renderer step over. If choose for outdoor scenes(for matte compositing and painting) redshift as like maxwell, indigo is perfect. For example Redshift is stealing leadership of SItoA. Like Corona for 3dsMax

About current C4D Physical, i don’t know for who it was develop?!


#10

at first krakatoa, now arnold…:slight_smile: great job daniel!
here is an arnold-render introduction from the developer:

https://vimeo.com/15878348


#11

Thanks Oli,

there are also several Tutorials for Arnold already, Sphere VFX and FXPHD, as well as NoorFX to name a few offers.


#12

Excited to see this thread.

I did the FXPHD Arnold course (using Maya). From everything I’ve watched I don’t think speed was the primary aim for Solid Angle. Arnold is designed to be easy for artists to set up and use and to give feedback quickly, hence its progressive nature. That’s not to say that its dumbed down, just that its much more intuitive than VRay (for instance) and doesn’t require a team of TDs like RenderMan can.

Daniel, can you tell us a bit about the integration with C4D, its shaders, mograph, motion blur etc?


#13

In my experience Arnold is very speedy, considering all the calculations it does in the background.

Well, so far its integrated and working, as Arnold uses own shaders, and needs to bake out other inputs internally, there is no priority yet in supporting the C4D noises for instance ( most shaders have their equivalent in Arnold anyways) Motion Blur works fine, as you can see in one of the top images. Mograph should work as well, maybe not as instances yet in all occasions, but that is on the list then.

I will post some UI peeks later;)


#14

Great to see this coming together… yes please to the UI pics.

Do you constantly have to ‘destroy scene’ for all updates to propagate to the renderer or have you solved this already? Does a scene with heavy geometry load into the renderer as quickly as the standard/built-in renderer?

I’m interested to know how you will continue to finance and support this excellent initiative as I’d like to see it continue. Are Solid Angle supporting your efforts financially, or do you intend to sell the bridge back to them, or will people have to purchase an Arnold license from Solid and the bridge separately from you?

Do you have a rough estimate for release or public beta?

Cheers
Phil


#15

UI pics soon, been busy today.

Destruction/breaking SDK support after updates, if you are referring to this, was a problem earlier but shouldn’t be in the future, depending also on Solid Angle oc.

Arnold is rendering directly inside Cinema 4D, so yes, the access speeds should be the same like sending it to kick.exe directly.

There are no clear plans about the potential future of this bridge yet. Many options are on the cards. Up till now we developed this solely as a private project independently and not supported by Solid Angle in any financial way.

Sorry, no estimate on the public release yet, but the coming weeks/months will tell, also depends on the actual user demand for C4DtoA, feedback from Solid Angle etc…

Will keep you updated here;)

cheers

Daniel


#16

Thanks for the answers Daniel. Would love to see this released - will be watching with interest.

Cheers
Phil


#17

Some Material tests I found, dont mind the rendertimes, I ran them on my email/office machine.


#18

so nice… :applause:


#19

I’m so psyched to see Arnold integrated in C4D, great work!
What are your plans for the future? Are you going the same way as VrayforC4D, releasing the bridge as your own product independently from solidangle?


#20

Look back 4 posts and Daniel has already said that this is yet to be determined.

Cheers
Phil