Version 3.00 - R1.1 (25.05.2016) Tweet

[pxlntwrk]

It's based on a test SDK. I'll make a new release based on previous SDK(3.00).

ok cool

[Improdu]

Hi Ahmet,

Maybe i missed something but on the v3 R1.1 i can't see the "scale" parameter in the scattering medium node?



Thanks

If you check old version you'll see just names are changed. Scale=density now.

Thanks for your reply, and btw congrats for this great v3 !

[momade]

Hello everybody.

Are there actually any tutorials for the baking camera around?

[alessiodevecchi]

Hello,

something strange is occurring while rendering an x-particles simulation.
it's a simulation driven by the XpSound modifier and in which the number of particles is pretty much constant for the entire duration.
Before rendering I cached the entire xp system. Despite this, I see an incremental render time for each frame. The first frame renders in a little over 20 seconds while frame 500 is up to 6m30s

Anyone noticed this behavior? Thanks in advance.

EDIT: stopping and re-starting the rendering results in fast rendering at first and then slows down again over a few frames. see attachment.

[Tag12345]

Hi Ahmet, Im hoping you could take into consideration the following! Thanks

I was wondering when we can maybe expect another big update for v3?

I just got octane, and I really like it, though I feel that it still needs a few more things before I can totally switch to it.

Things such as having different light types is probably one of the biggest things (spot light, and maybe similar to an omni light would help), along with having better control over volumetric lighting and such.

Ive used Arnold before using Octane, and I think that the system they have with how they approached volumetric lighting is nice, where you have a main texture to globally control all volumetric lighting in the scene and have settings on each light to control individual volumetrics. (which can sorta alleviate the fog sky mess (which i think is sort of confusing)

Now Im really new to Octane, but Ive been through a lot of Render Engines to see that Octane, Thea, and Arnold right now are really great, but they all seem to lack many small things (at least for me) for large production animations.

The other thing that sort of bothers me is the fact that its complicated to just simply have a Sky as a background and also have a sky just for fog. From my tests, I couldnt do both, only one or the other.

Lastly, I think that there should be a better conversion for C4D mats.
I understand that octane & c4d materials are very unsimilar, but I make the argument that most of these other render engines have done them a bit better as far as conversions and intergration.

I also noticed that when you do have a sky with fog on, you get very weird results when zooming towards a light, the light/fog is amplified by an insane amount.

Again, this is just me as a new user trying to figure out Octane and also hoping for new improvements. Its mainly with Lights and some material stuff, but Octane as a whole is amazing and I cant wait to see whats in store. Though I am definitely hoping for better changes when it comes to volumetrics/fog, as it just looks messy at the moment as far as everything you have to do to get it to behave just right.

Thanks for any answers and future responses I get to this. Please understand I am not an advanced Octane user, this is just from minimal testing and what ive seen as a new user. I know there are little fixes for certain things, but I just wish for easier use of some of these concepts, as ive seen in other renderers.

feel free to share thoughts and such, ill keep tabs on here when I can.

[aoktar]

Hello,

something strange is occurring while rendering an x-particles simulation.
it's a simulation driven by the XpSound modifier and in which the number of particles is pretty much constant for the entire duration.
Before rendering I cached the entire xp system. Despite this, I see an incremental render time for each frame. The first frame renders in a little over 20 seconds while frame 500 is up to 6m30s

Anyone noticed this behavior? Thanks in advance.

EDIT: stopping and re-starting the rendering results in fast rendering at first and then slows down again over a few frames. see attachment.

motion blur?

[alessiodevecchi]

Hello,

something strange is occurring while rendering an x-particles simulation.
it's a simulation driven by the XpSound modifier and in which the number of particles is pretty much constant for the entire duration.
Before rendering I cached the entire xp system. Despite this, I see an incremental render time for each frame. The first frame renders in a little over 20 seconds while frame 500 is up to 6m30s

Anyone noticed this behavior? Thanks in advance.

EDIT: stopping and re-starting the rendering results in fast rendering at first and then slows down again over a few frames. see attachment.

motion blur?

motion blur was actually on. i switched it off now. let's see!

[aoktar]

Things such as having different light types is probably one of the biggest things (spot light, and maybe similar to an omni light would help), along with having better control over volumetric lighting and such.

Ive used Arnold before using Octane, and I think that the system they have with how they approached volumetric lighting is nice, where you have a main texture to globally control all volumetric lighting in the scene and have settings on each light to control individual volumetrics. (which can sorta alleviate the fog sky mess (which i think is sort of confusing)

Now Im really new to Octane, but Ive been through a lot of Render Engines to see that Octane, Thea, and Arnold right now are really great, but they all seem to lack many small things (at least for me) for large production animations.
The other thing that sort of bothers me is the fact that its complicated to just simply have a Sky as a background and also have a sky just for fog. From my tests, I couldnt do both, only one or the other.

I also noticed that when you do have a sky with fog on, you get very weird results when zooming towards a light, the light/fog is amplified by an insane amount.

Again, this is just me as a new user trying to figure out Octane and also hoping for new improvements. Its mainly with Lights and some material stuff, but Octane as a whole is amazing and I cant wait to see whats in store. Though I am definitely hoping for better changes when it comes to volumetrics/fog, as it just looks messy at the moment as far as everything you have to do to get it to behave just right.

Thanks for any answers and future responses I get to this. Please understand I am not an advanced Octane user, this is just from minimal testing and what ive seen as a new user. I know there are little fixes for certain things, but I just wish for easier use of some of these concepts, as ive seen in other renderers.

feel free to share thoughts and such, ill keep tabs on here when I can.

These are engine based. So i can't do anything without having. But why do you want poing light? It's simply most fake light type. Also these are doable by parameters, shapes, textures via octane light tag.
Better to use volume box for environment.

Lastly, I think that there should be a better conversion for C4D mats.
I understand that octane & c4d materials are very unsimilar, but I make the argument that most of these other render engines have done them a bit better as far as conversions and intergration.

Yes very unsimilar. Stay connected to see improvements. It's a proof the our development road since first release.

[alessiodevecchi]

Hello,

something strange is occurring while rendering an x-particles simulation.
it's a simulation driven by the XpSound modifier and in which the number of particles is pretty much constant for the entire duration.
Before rendering I cached the entire xp system. Despite this, I see an incremental render time for each frame. The first frame renders in a little over 20 seconds while frame 500 is up to 6m30s

Anyone noticed this behavior? Thanks in advance.

EDIT: stopping and re-starting the rendering results in fast rendering at first and then slows down again over a few frames. see attachment.

motion blur?

hey ahmet! that is it. without motion blur the render time / frame is constant. thanks.
...but why is that anyways?

[valters]

Hi Ahmet, Im hoping you could take into consideration the following! Thanks

I was wondering when we can maybe expect another big update for v3?

I just got octane, and I really like it, though I feel that it still needs a few more things before I can totally switch to it.

Things such as having different light types is probably one of the biggest things (spot light, and maybe similar to an omni light would help), along with having better control over volumetric lighting and such.

Ive used Arnold before using Octane, and I think that the system they have with how they approached volumetric lighting is nice, where you have a main texture to globally control all volumetric lighting in the scene and have settings on each light to control individual volumetrics. (which can sorta alleviate the fog sky mess (which i think is sort of confusing)

Now Im really new to Octane, but Ive been through a lot of Render Engines to see that Octane, Thea, and Arnold right now are really great, but they all seem to lack many small things (at least for me) for large production animations.

The other thing that sort of bothers me is the fact that its complicated to just simply have a Sky as a background and also have a sky just for fog. From my tests, I couldnt do both, only one or the other.

Lastly, I think that there should be a better conversion for C4D mats.
I understand that octane & c4d materials are very unsimilar, but I make the argument that most of these other render engines have done them a bit better as far as conversions and intergration.

I also noticed that when you do have a sky with fog on, you get very weird results when zooming towards a light, the light/fog is amplified by an insane amount.

Again, this is just me as a new user trying to figure out Octane and also hoping for new improvements. Its mainly with Lights and some material stuff, but Octane as a whole is amazing and I cant wait to see whats in store. Though I am definitely hoping for better changes when it comes to volumetrics/fog, as it just looks messy at the moment as far as everything you have to do to get it to behave just right.

Thanks for any answers and future responses I get to this. Please understand I am not an advanced Octane user, this is just from minimal testing and what ive seen as a new user. I know there are little fixes for certain things, but I just wish for easier use of some of these concepts, as ive seen in other renderers.

feel free to share thoughts and such, ill keep tabs on here when I can.

Im not from a Otoy team but im one of who using Octane since 2014. First I think this post should go to request section. Second is that better to understand engine before asking strange things. Yes there is some gaps but Octane always in development and with each update its better and better. With version 2 i had situations that i couldn't done but with release 3 mostly everything is possible.. If you will follow tutorials for v3 you will open many new things for your self and will have less questions (about spot lights too)
As for me If you are freelancer then GPU render is the only goodand reliable solution and Octane here the best. Fast, Responsive, Greatest ever i seen support and development. With this speed of development and company vision we will see Octane in a world top 3 render engines in a 3-4 years for all kind of productions. This is what i can tell you and my updated vision with release of V3