I’m open to discussion, but I’ll speak with my customers before taking any decision. I think we all agree there is room for improvements to the working conditions of external developers and in general about the coordination of external development. Anyway, for this discussion the thread is here. And in the mean time, I will now concentrate on my work.
What is the problem here - that things may not end up in master? Since anyone who’s paying gets access to the source code, those changes aren’t locked away. Anyone who wants those changes in master can bring them there, right now.
Is the big difference really just about that where that open and free source code is stored?
If he is saying that he will merge the changes into master, then yes, not merging them into master is a problem. A big factor in many people’s decision on whether or not they want to support him comes down to whether or not everyone will get the benefits. Until the changes are in master, not everyone gets the benefits.
The changes ‘as is’ doesn’t equal a merge-ready patch. That’s the issue. There is a lot of work involved in getting significant changes ready to be merged into a large codebase - he is promising this will be done. Throwing the code at BI devs and watching them say it isn’t good enough isn’t going to benefit anyone.
Anyway, this isn’t the place to be discussing this, if we want to discuss better ways for independent developers to work on Blender, head over to the other thread bilibili has set up.
problem with 2.8 gtx1060 - it renders only 40% then I get the error: “CUDA error: Illegal address in cuCtxSynchronize(), line 1686”
It happens on some windows machine, there is a text file explaining how to fix this bug on the product page.
Edit: I called it “readme first” and put it just beneath the current release to make it more visible.
The february update it now available. It’s about 5% faster in mean, up to 10% on top of the existing speedup. It also has a new option to reduce noise, allowing to render about 20% faster for the same noise level. The original idea is from solid angle, the implementation from Lukas Stockner, updated and fixed by @Dragon.Studio and me.
Here an example of architecture fly through. 1min54 per frame at full resolution
Original scene from Evermotion. So it works perfectly with animations, even with complex light path through glass.
You can get the 2.8x or 2.7x version until this midnight UTC+1 time at reduced price. If you prefer smaller rates, you can get 2.8x here.
As usual, if you find any bug, you can send me a file to reproduce per Email or PM and I’ll have a look.
I did this edit, but still it renders to 42% and stops.
i’ve been getting that error a load on my WIn10/GTX970, flat out will not render my scene - it has baked fire stuff in it, which may be a factor. tried optimising the materials etc, oddly enough though it run no prob at all on my Win7/GTX980 machine.
Ok, thanks for the report. Then you can provide a file per PM with OS, graphic card and driver version and I’ll have a look.
@wolfie138 maybe it’s indeed the same bug, if you can provide a file, it will help.
Bugs are expected with new feature updates
i’ll try the new release over the weekend, if i still get the same/similar i’ll see if i can narrow anything down (eg, just have a file w/ only the domain in) and let you know.
I just made another animation test. It’s a real pleasure to have them ready so fast 1min15 per image at original resolution.
Scene from evermotion
There are now 4 hours left to get E-Cycles at a reduced price https://gumroad.com/l/tsTuV/vkmd7zh
Seems that is my fault =) I was playing with GPU overclocking and it causes to CUDA bug. I’ve disabled overclock and everything works as should. Thanks, now I have 2x faster renders.
One suggestion I’d have for those animations is that any time you render anything that moves, at all, I mean even if it’s just 2 frames… as long as it’s not a still image, always use motion blur, always
I usually cringe when I see CG animations in motion with motion blur off, because they immediately get that stuttering, fake CG motion look It’s especially common with archviz people. They tend to forget motion blur the most, and then wonder why their animations look so off
By the way, do you use static or moving noise pattern? You probably already know it, but just to make sure - if you use moving noise pattern then the flickering of denoised animation is much stronger. With static noise pattern it’s nearly non existent
Thanks for the tip, I indeed used static seed. I really just made 6 camera placement and launched anim rendering, so it was luck evermotion had it off Animation denoising is coming soon, so the problem will be soon even more subtle, I find it really ok actually as it is. As you say, it’s nearly non-existent, I guess Lukas is working so hard so that it’s also stable at very low sample count.
Yes, sure. It does look really good considering they are minute rendertimes, but I don’t think it’s the quality one could hand over as final to a client Non the less, if this is 1:15, then 5:00 per frame would probably be good enough, which is still really great for interior anim
Are you discussing semantics he never say he will merge the changes in master
bliblubli say he sending the code to the blender foundation if and if it merged is no more his responsibility
This may sound like a rough question to ask, or even a tricky one, but please don’t read this the wrong way.
What is the guarantee that these changes would be merged into master? I mean, this is great stuff, but I’m a bit reluctant to focus my workflow on a separate Blender version which development can be stopped at any time.