Page 1 of 2

Ocean test with Cinema 4d

Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2015 10:38 pm
by JonathanWinbush
Alittle test render I put together using Cinema 4D plugin Hot4d

Re: Ocean test with Cinema 4d

Posted: Wed Sep 30, 2015 3:20 pm
by Bendbox
Man that looks great! Love the foam, very nice.

How many frames total? 144? how much time per frame on what graphics card(s)?

Re: Ocean test with Cinema 4d

Posted: Wed Sep 30, 2015 6:34 pm
by JonathanWinbush
Thanks

I rendered 24fps at 720p just to test it out but overall took about 15 minutes to render but the samples aren't super high either.
I just built a new machine so it was the i7 Intel Skylake, 32gb of ram and the titan x grfx card but I think I might have to add maybe a 980ti to gain some more power Octane is just so addicting I can't believe Cinema hasnt added gpu rendering with this last release.

Re: Ocean test with Cinema 4d

Posted: Wed Sep 30, 2015 8:03 pm
by Bendbox
That is quite a graphics card you've got, nice!

I've got a single 780, but not doing much animations. I'm hoping to get a new rig next year with 3-4 cards in it.

Re: Ocean test with Cinema 4d

Posted: Wed Sep 30, 2015 10:22 pm
by JonathanWinbush
Man 4 cards would be a beast of a machine. In the long run its cheaper than building a little conventional render farm I think its more cost effective to use octane and add more cards to it.

Re: Ocean test with Cinema 4d

Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 6:13 pm
by Bendbox
JonathanWinbush wrote:In the long run its cheaper than building a little conventional render farm I think its more cost effective to use octane and add more cards to it.
Definitely, no doubt about that. Adding graphics cards is easy as long as you have a Mobo and power supply that will handle it. Adding additional CPU processing power though . . . not so much! Even CPU based render farms are a pain, at least the one we used to deal with was.

I've heard a few people mention GPU expander boxes, but I'm not sure how well they actually work. I've got one PC here with thunderbolt connectivity on it, so it's intriguing. I might have to do more research into expander boxes. If anyone reading this has had any positive or negative experience with GPU expander boxes, I'd love to hear about it.

Re: Ocean test with Cinema 4d

Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 8:09 pm
by Goldorak
JonathanWinbush wrote:Alittle test render I put together using Cinema 4D plugin Hot4d
This is awesome! Out of curiosity, are you able to export this scene as an ORBX file and render the frames in standalone? Would it work as a 360 pano render?

If so, we'd like to try rendering this on ORC as an 18K VR stereo cube map video . We are looking for cool animated Octane user content (~6 seconds, loopable is a plus) to showcase in the new ORBX player for Gear VR.

Please email [email protected] if you are interested. This also goes for anyone else that might have short, visually striking animated ORBX scenes that they'd be open to contributing as VR video samples.

Re: Ocean test with Cinema 4d

Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:34 pm
by JonathanWinbush
Goldorak wrote:
JonathanWinbush wrote:Alittle test render I put together using Cinema 4D plugin Hot4d
This is awesome! Out of curiosity, are you able to export this scene as an ORBX file and render the frames in standalone? Would it work as a 360 pano render?

If so, we'd like to try rendering this on ORC as an 18K VR stereo cube map video . We are looking for cool animated Octane user content (~6 seconds, loopable is a plus) to showcase in the new ORBX player for Gear VR.

Please email [email protected] if you are interested. This also goes for anyone else that might have short, visually striking animated ORBX scenes that they'd be open to contributing as VR video samples.
I haven't messed with the Stand Alone version yet can, I export from Cinema 4d to the Stand alone seamlessly?
This weekend I can play around with it I actually have the DK2 and Gear VR so I've been wanting to play around with the VR 360 stuff.

Re: Ocean test with Cinema 4d

Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:36 pm
by JonathanWinbush
Bendbox wrote:
JonathanWinbush wrote:In the long run its cheaper than building a little conventional render farm I think its more cost effective to use octane and add more cards to it.
Definitely, no doubt about that. Adding graphics cards is easy as long as you have a Mobo and power supply that will handle it. Adding additional CPU processing power though . . . not so much! Even CPU based render farms are a pain, at least the one we used to deal with was.

I've heard a few people mention GPU expander boxes, but I'm not sure how well they actually work. I've got one PC here with thunderbolt connectivity on it, so it's intriguing. I might have to do more research into expander boxes. If anyone reading this has had any positive or negative experience with GPU expander boxes, I'd love to hear about it.
I havent heard of a GPU expander box. Wouldn't it be better to have it connected directly to the motherboard or doesn't it matter?

Re: Ocean test with Cinema 4d

Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:54 pm
by Goldorak
JonathanWinbush wrote:
Goldorak wrote:
JonathanWinbush wrote:Alittle test render I put together using Cinema 4D plugin Hot4d
This is awesome! Out of curiosity, are you able to export this scene as an ORBX file and render the frames in standalone? Would it work as a 360 pano render?

If so, we'd like to try rendering this on ORC as an 18K VR stereo cube map video . We are looking for cool animated Octane user content (~6 seconds, loopable is a plus) to showcase in the new ORBX player for Gear VR.

Please email [email protected] if you are interested. This also goes for anyone else that might have short, visually striking animated ORBX scenes that they'd be open to contributing as VR video samples.
I haven't messed with the Stand Alone version yet can, I export from Cinema 4d to the Stand alone seamlessly?
This weekend I can play around with it I actually have the DK2 and Gear VR so I've been wanting to play around with the VR 360 stuff.
In theory, exporting to an ORBX file should cover anything that is rendered in the C4D viewport. It has been extensively tested with Max, Maya and LW, but less so with C4D. If we run into issues, we can work on addressing them in the plug-in where the exporting happens. The output may be larger, as the mesh is baked into an alembic file, but it should render in the standalone, which means it will work on the cloud too.