Speed ups are only on GPU. So GPU + CPU won’t see a big difference do GPU only for comparing. CPU + GPU rendering seems brokenish so that should never be used for benchmarking anyways
Interesting. Re-running some benchmarks on pure gpu now:
classroom - 33% faster
bmw - 27% faster
barcelona - 17% faster
koro - 9% faster
fishy cat - 7% faster
not enough vram to render barbershop 
The numbers do indeed look much better on GPU
1 Like
Meanwhile, Sergey just committed an optimization to Cycle’s BVH builder, resulting in noticeably faster rendertimes for a variety of scenes (with interiors and complex characters seeming to benefit the most).
https://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-blender-cvs/2018-August/113640.html
6 Likes
Master should have out of core rendering? Is it crashing or did you just not run it ?
it was swapping so hard I cancelled it. it was going to take 10x longer than the cpu render
Well that scene should be better on cpu anyways
I like the idea of being into the simplify panel , because it convey the idea of faster render at the price of quality.
Having it into the experimental mode doesn’t fit for me because if I understand correctly it’s for temporary stuff that’s not finished yet but at some point will leave experimental.
Anyway I think it’s fair for dev’s to choose want they want to include maintain and support into blender, even if most of us would like it to be in master … Otherwise blender and dev’s team would be perfect and perfection would create chaos in the universe maybe ?
That does make sense. It also allows you to have different settings for viewport and final render.
1 Like
Doesn’t it make sense exactly because of that? Making it possible to use it maybe only in viewport to speed up previews?
1 Like
Moony was agreeing with sozap. He said does not doesn’t.
Ah, sorry, speedy reading
A new patch from Charlie bringing an improvement to the way the Voronoi Crackle feature is calculated.
https://developer.blender.org/D3673
An example from the devtalk forum
Brecht has already given his approval for adding it 
8 Likes
Nice - i’m all for any improvements to procedural textures.
+1 Yes ,if you have more options, to imitade real surfaces.the better it is.
like in this rightclickselect thread.
https://blender.community/c/rightclickselect/V8bbbc/add-more-noise-type-nodes
i even saw this video,what is possible with just noise.a few years ago, i rendered many landscape renderings with Terragen.Terragen has a very nice slope shader with fuzzy control and height control.with this kind of slope shader you can simulate sand and snow layers even grass layers very quick,and with the fuzzy control you blend the sharpness very nice.
the interesting part start a 10min.
3 Likes
I think a couple of decent ‘tile’ textures would also be a good to add to Blender’s repertoire. Ones that can do a variety of regular tile patterns like triangles, hexagons, regular polka dots etc.
Different patterns for the brick shader would also be nice (like herringbone, basket weave etc).
Combined with the existing noise textures - these could be very powerful.
1 Like
Yeah,these combinations in theory are endless.you can make your own textures,displacements,roughness maps whatever you can imagine,for example making own custom brushes for sculpting with it.beside that,these procedural shaders are very light in storage space.
Indeed. I like the look of these procedural textures for Lightwave:
http://www.shaders.co.uk/ifw2_textures/procedurals.htm
They look very familiar and remind me of the ‘Essence’ procedural texture pack that was available with Imagine 3D way back in the early to mid 1990s on the Amiga (which is how I got into 3D modelling - and also shows my age somewhat ). Perhaps the IFW textures are a derivation of the essence textures.
http://3d.faws.org/docs_ess.php
I’m actually pretty shocked that these still appear to be the pinnacle of procedural texture generation. If anything, things appear to have moved backwards with regards to procedurals. We have access to far fewer procedural textures/patterns than was available over 30 years ago.
1 Like
Wow,these Lightwave procedurals collection are impressive.This looks allmost complete.
If I’m not mistaken they were integrated into MODO long ago: https://learn.foundry.com/modo/content/help/pages/shading_lighting/emodo_textures.html
Yep - the modo ones do look very similar.
Given that the only packages these textures have appeared in as far as I can tell are commercial ones (Imagine, Lightwave and Modo) - I suspect the source code for these isn’t open and therefore would be unavailable for Blender.
Those textures coupled with cycles nodes would be incredibly powerful.
I actually don’t think there are as many textures as it looks like. Peened for example simply looks like an inverted version of Dino Skin. Similarly Frog Skin looks like Dino skin but with a different falloff curve on the bump.
Some like lattice 3 are easily reproduceable with nodes and many seem to be derivations on Voronoi or Musgrave.
It’s the more regular textures like Parquet, Spots, Stamped, Hexagonal and Octagonal times, Tri-Tiles. Basket, Layer Properties, counter etc that are interesting.
1 Like