An argument for re-introducing Blender Internal in version 2.81 (or, 2.80 final)


(smadoc) #61

As greenorangejuice mentioned, if you have a business case for keeping BI, make a donation to the blender team as encouragement to add a new and enhanced BI.

I dont get to use blender as much as I’d like, and recently I’ve discovered how nice BI can be as in some cases renders can look as nice as cycles, but take much less time.

Curious, what advances in 2.8 do you like that’s not in 2.79? If it’s the UI, i THINK, some of it can be done with themes and custom UI setups. As I said I dont use blender as much as I’d like and havent looked at 2.8 that much so not familiar with the difference other than the big ones like eevee and the ui layout.


(T.R.O Nunes) #62

Simply stated, it doesn’t matter that you need it. It matters what the majority of people who fund development fund and Blender cloud (the two primary organizations working on blender development) push for.
Cycles is behind industry giants like Arnold and Renderman, and isn’t really considered better than Vray and Octane etc. It needs all the attention it can get.
Eevee is cool but to get the full potential it still needs so much work. That is not including the reality that Optix is probably only the beginning of real-time raytracing. All of that and what comes of it will require attention from devs to support Cycles and Eevee.
With that in mind 2.8-1-2… isn’t even close to finished outside rendering.

On top of all that the devs would need to refactor BI into standalone version and then build the whole plug-in part. Possible, probably yes, but why on earth would they without massive community push behind it? It would be great deal away from something else.
If there really is enough monetary benefit behind it then the most sure way would for people with that kind of use case to band together and hire dev or two to work on refactoring BI to standalone renderer and creating 2.8 plugin for that.

I personally don’t want resources that could be used on bringing the rest of corner-case features Cycles/Eeevee lack from BI wasted on refactoring BI.


(JohnMalcolm1970) #63

As an argument “I need it” is fairly weak. If there are a great number of users in your situation - making money from things created using Blender Internal then you should all get together and put some of that money into having a developer create something for you.

You can still use 2.79 or any older Blender version going way back to the start.
You can even use 2.8 for modelling and then Append objects back into 2.79 for rendering.

I’d rather the Blender developers spent their time on moving Blender forward rather than resurrecting a decades old render engine.

Perhaps if you showed some examples of the type of work you are referring to people might be able to help you find ways to emulate it in Cycles or EEVEE. Even better, do some stuff in Cycles or EEVEE and show it to your customers. They might like it.


(Martynas Žiemys) #64

That is simply not true. If it is, where are all of those people with all of those projects? Why is it so hard to find their presence online? It seems to me you are one of the very few people who use BI for the last couple of years and one of even fewer of those who use it to make a living. If it worked, for you business, that’s great, but the time to move on has already passed quite a few years back. It might be a little bit tough to hear, but if you wish to use such a renderer for business, you are probably putting your business at risk. It makes it easy for your competition to provide better quality services faster and more efficiently. New technologies are better in many ways, allow more efficient workflows that enable new possibilities that you simply cannot offer to your clients. This argument does not seem reasonable to me at all. If you care about your business you should be running away from BI. The new technologies replacing it -EEVEE - will be superior in every way. It makes sense to upgrade your old projects as well - your clients will eventually see what is going on around them if they don’t already. What then? It makes sense to have something that you can offer to them with future in mind in order to keep them. This request makes little sense. BI is not coming back - that is certain.


(XYZero) #65

I have yet to understand any concise, concrete, point by point reasoning for this request by the OP. Either from him/her business needs or the customers usage needs. None.
Other than “I need this”…customers need this".
All replies from members here at BA, seem to feel the same way.

So sundialsvc…what is the reasoning for not doing so?
At this point, I am really interested to understand why.
Is it secret work product/workflow? Signing customers NDA?
And if you cant explain point by point…why would Blender Foundation even, for a nanosecond, consider this request?
Not trying to be combative here, just trying to understand your business/workflow deficiency issue here.
Thanks.


(Jason van Gumster) #66

To be fair, @sundialsvc4 isn’t the only one. Some of us who use Blender professionally can’t show our work. And yes, I do use Blender Internal on a daily basis. The future isn’t coming as fast as you’re claiming… but there’s also not a compelling reason to drag the past forward.

I’m not advocating re-inclusion of Blender Internal. I’d just like Eevee to have feature parity with it… currently it’s not quite there yet. However, I don’t have any problem sticking with 2.79 (or the 2.79 branch in the dev repo) until there is parity there’s a decent enough workaround for missing features.


(Martynas Žiemys) #67

I am sure it has its uses. Do you think EEVEE will struggle replacing any of BI’s functionality in your workflows once 2.80 is released?


(BluePrintRandom) #68

is weight painting fixed yet in 2.8?

that was a deal breaker for me.


(XYZero) #69

If I may ask, is this because of your customers needs, your workflow needs or both?
I came from MODO to beginning blender/cycles, so never really used BI.
Hope everyone understands my questioning of late concerning this.
Thanks.


(Jason van Gumster) #70

My guess is that there will be some hiccups in Eevee when 2.80 is released and I’ll have an overlap period for as much as 6 months where I’ll be running both 2.80 and 2.79. Eventually, though, I expect there to be feature parity… or some approximation thereof.


(Jason van Gumster) #71

Little bit of both.

There are a few esoteric things that I could work around now using Cycles in combination with the compositor, but it can be quite a hit on render time (and I’m rendering sequences of multiple thousands of images… so every savings in render speed is a help).


(XYZero) #72

So this is primarily an animation advantage using BI?


(EdgeMaster) #73

Having pulled it out, clean it up and make it work consistently with the new interface model. Then, put it back in as an available option. It is still a very powerful and viable rendering technique, and there are a helluva lot of still-important [commercial …] Blender projects out there which use it and still need it.

I think you are really underestimating the difficulty and I think this is a byproduct of developers making progress look so easy. Developing software on the level of Blender is REALLY hard work. While it looks like you can just pull bits out, polish them up and put them back, the reality is nothing like that at all and the cons outweigh the pros by a long shot. I would be guessing it would be weeks if not months of developer work and then it would need to be maintained.

Part of a good product is deciding both what to do and what not do do. While I did like to tinker around with BI, it’s days are numbered and the industry has moved on from renderers like that. It is just not worth the effort.

Unless someone has big piles of money to spend on converting it to an external renderer, it should be left alone in 2.79 where it is perfectly useble. 2.8+ has more important goals to accomplish like a materials library, advanced texture painting, opensubdiv and other features to make Blender stand out.

I would love to have older features to stay (Carve boolean removal makes me cry) but things have to move on.


(Jason van Gumster) #74

Animation is where I see it often, but it’s not the only place. Setup is moderately faster for simple materials, too (particularly NPR materials).


(m9105826) #75

These are all of the same arguments that people made when Mental Ray died and PRMan switched to a path tracing-based core. It didn’t end the world or put anyone out of business then, and it won’t now.


#76

Its a huge mistake to compare BI with Eevee , because when BI was removed it was a mature, heavily improved render engine while Eevee is still a baby that barely opened its eyes for the first time. It will only get better which is why you wont be seeing BI returning back any time soon.

In the mean time there are render engines that can fill the gap, Yafray was an old competitor of BI , so maybe give external render engines a try, many of them are free and specifically designed to work with Blender.


(Martynas Žiemys) #77

Wait a second… It’s a huge mistake to compare BI to EEVEE, but you compare it to a Montecarlo raytracing renderer?.. How does that work? I think it doesn’t work at all. They are completely different things as far as I can tell. It also seems to me it is fine to compare BI to EEVEE since EEVEE is replacing BI. I think everything is going to be fine.


(BluePrintRandom) #78

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


(LordRaven) #79

I honestly don’t see what the problem is. I converted all my projects from BI to Cycles a long time ago.
There are automatic conversions for the materials. They aren’t perfect but they do all the tedious work for you. (Of course you have to manually adjust them but it’s not that hard).
Does it look different? Yes. It looks better. Especially the lighting.
So no I don’t think it’s a good idea to get BI back. We have EEVEE and Cycles now. It would put more strain on the developers. I’d rather have them focus on Cycles/EEVEE and other features.


#80

No idea how it works … mainly because I made none such comparison ?

Assuming you mean me comparing Eeevee and BI. So essentially I have no idea what you are talking about.