There can be no guarantee BUT:
- project files are 100% compatible with vanilla blender
- the course is available to teach you how to maintain your own build easily if you so choose.
There can be no guarantee BUT:
As long as he does not include something like colored wire-frames in the patch, the chances are definitely higher.
Even if you know how, maintaining an ongoing branch while master makes significant changes isn’t easy. Any time Blender developers touch the same regions of code that has been changed in one of the patches you applied to your version, you better understand how to code and resolve the conflict. It takes time to merge conflicts.
The probability of BF merging the changes is a big deal. If he is working for a year only to dump his changes on them ‘as is’ the probability of them accepting it is near zero.
Because by saying he will send it to BF, he is giving the impression that people helping him are helping the whole community. This simply isn’t the case. He isn’t talking with the developers at all so chances are many of his changes won’t be accepted. There are plenty of valid reasons not to accept a patch, but he could have fixed this by just being open with the community and BF devs about what changes are being made and why, which would have a big influence on both how many changes will be merged, and the realistic understanding of such by his customers.
Yeah he culd be doing this and still sell his service. People don’t really build their own binaries and especially don’t build their own with submitted and unaccepted patches. It couldn’t hurt to open the dialog with the developers now and get the process going. If they’re not accepted, no big deal, he’s still providing binaries for customers that offer something the main tree doesn’t. It also gets these kinds of things on the developers radars instead of just popping up a year later when developers might have already spent time working on the same issues but in a different, possibly incompatible but equally good way.
There’s nothing stopping anyone from getting a month of service or the class just for the patches and submitting them but it feels really icky because they’re not the developer and it would show up under their name instead of blibuli’s.
This is exactly it. He could be doing one thing a little bit differently and benefit everyone in the process.
There is this issue, and also the issue that submitting a patch isn’t just a matter of yes or no, but almost certainly involves making changes to the code - sometimes quite big changes - such that it can be merged without conflicting with other areas of development. ‘Someone else’ wouldn’t know how to do this, so it doesn’t really matter who does it, if they don’t have the skills to modify the code confidently, and develop code in a professional manner, it has very little chance of being merged at all.
Also, from what I understand, some of the patches he is using are ones which are already available on places like Graphicall, which either haven’t spiked the interest of the BI developers, of have been considered and rejected already. He is doing new work too, but this is another thing to keep in mind.
Guys, just be sure you’re happy paying for his stuff under the assumption nothing makes its way into master and you get no further builds/improvements after you stop paying. If you’re happy with that, then that’s great, I’m sure you’ll enjoy learning from who seems to be an experienced developer. Otherwise, think carefully about the choice - there’s a lot you don’t know, and probably even more that you’re not aware that you don’t know. You’re paying for his time, not for improvements to Blender - just remember that.
Why performance is different than new features available with add-ons? In both cases, a developer had to spend the time to code something on the top of the blender. Why people are not demanding from a developer, for example of MeshMashine or Auto-RigPro or Asset Management to reveal their code or marge it to the master? Same case - some functionality lacking in Blender. Why can’t E-Cycles be treated just as an add-on? Some add-ons are free, some are paid. It is his choice - if you don;t like it you don’t need to use it. For me, it is as simple as that.
Right, paying for it as just another add-on is perfectly fine. He seems to be doing fantastic work.
The point @smilebags is making is that some users might be confused to think they’re supporting functionality that’s being actively developed to be included in master.
The author does say he will submit his work, but it doesn’t guarantee getting into master, especially since he’s not working with the developers from the get-go to make sure his work is meeting their standards.
Spot on. There are a few differences between this and an addon. With add-ons there is the understanding that you’re paying for the addon, not paying for development of Blender.
Addons are also much more future proof than builds. Addons can be expected to work until another large rework of Blender, basically for all of 2.8x. Having to pull and merge, followed by build your own Blender already sucks, but there’s no chance you won’t have conflicts when merging master into your branch. You have to intimately know Cycles to be able to do anything about that.
Addons just work. Builds don’t.
How it focuses your workflow? Whatever version of Blender you use, you just hit render in both cases. Your workflow is the same and all files are 100% the same as those of Blender.
On top of that:
There are all kinds of customers with all kinds of budgets, so you can certainly hand this over to some customers.
In a night, you manage to make the thread derail again and speak about all your fears. I reworded as you like, started a discussion with you on how to make it better. You said twice a thing and it’s contrary with a few hours in between: (exact original sentences are in the links, most of the time the post are bigger than a screen…)
“a year to release my changes is too long” then “the render farm never releasing the improvement they made is a success story”
“make a patreon” then “patreon is a paywall”
Yet you seem to never come to a really good solution so you keep coming back here to make false claim. I will not write pages just to speak about all your fears and what can happen. An asteroid may also fall on earth tomorrow and everything everyone do on earth today would make no sens, cause we are all going to die, etc… And I can’t guarantee an asteroid is not going to come soon.
I paid for many addons that are not developed anymore on the market (https://blendermarket.com/products/random-object-array/, https://blendermarket.com/products/sprytile-tilemap-tools, https://blendermarket.com/products/shaderworks, etc.) so there is exactly the same risk for every development, C or python and again, the BF itself throw money from community in things that never get included in master, so why keep insisting that it’s only the case for E-Cycles???
And with E-Cycles as already said, any professional is going to have it’s yearly cost covered in less than a month, so even if development would stop after a year, it would have been a great time and money saver.
Oh and particles nodes, everything nodes, etc. uses money from donators since 2011 https://fund.blender.org/grants/ (right at the bottom, the first grant is about it and several following ones), yet nothing in master. So what about making a fear campaign in the BF donation thread about the possibility that some things will never be merged in master? Or do you just reserved this to E-Cycles? I know spreading fear is the new trend, but I have a better solution, just keep your fear for you, people can also find what is good for them by themselves.
I understand you may be angry that I’m bringing up issues about your development and funding practices. I will keep this short so I don’t further derail your thread since you seem to have flagged many of my recent comments.
Your quotes about contradictory statements are incomplete and have been brought out of context. You will find each of the statements in context make perfect sense and don’t contradict each other.
Grants given to BF are done such that people can work with the Blender team to integrate a change into Blender. It seems you have no intention of reporting to BF at all until you ‘submit your changes to be added’. This small difference leads to a very different outcome.
From your gumroad page:
- help make Blender better. It will help me invest more time in coding instead of doing it on my free time like before. All the improvements will be proposed to the Blender Foundation after a year
- Be sure your money will be used to make Cycles better
If you intend on fulfilling these promises, you need to work with the Blender developers. If you don’t, remove them.
I won’t be replying to this thread any further unless someone tags me and specifically requests me to answer a question and I feel like answering it is beneficial.
You’re annoying in that way. Bliblubli is not violating the GPL and does not have to do what you say. It’s like you want to be right no matter what.
I’m not angry about you bringing issues, I’m pointing out that the risks you points are in any development, not specific to this one, yet you bring it only here.
You give the impression you have solutions, but when asked in the other thread to bring one that is proved to work, you just keep criticizing or stay on a theoretical level. The BF fund page show that intern or extern, the risk of things not going into master are there.
About your contradictory statements, I gave the link so everybody can make his own opinion, at least one other person sees like me.
Everyone coding for Blender helps make it better. If the BF uses this external help wisely is another problem. You are welcome to make a thread about it. I did everything Brecht asked for to include my patch after the funding last year, although the money was way below the level I set. But to be respectful to my donators, I did it. Now you try to make people to not trust me based on nothing, because the said patch is now in master.
If Brecht ask so, I’ll replace Cycles with E-Cycles in the statement you quoted.
And about fear, I think that facing it often shows things one fear are not really dangerous and can even be a great help if one accept it.
I can’t think why anyone could be confused. It clear that it is a separate product and you pay for what it is said - performance in a separate build. @bliblubli said that he will send it to master after one year but it doesn’t mean that it will be merged. There are some older builds with sobol and other perfomance tricks made by many peeple. Some are free but devs didn’t want to make them into master because it wasn’t stable. it wasn’t tested, there were same problems etc. @bliblubli made a build with all those tricks and released it. It wasn’t one night to make it so he charges money for that. I can’t see any problem here.
I didn’t use the right word, sorry. But you’re right.
I will consider support e-cycles.
I have one more question: how about rendering heavy scenes with particles and specially volumetrics, where CPU is more suited. Can I expect improvements?
Right, had time to do a couple tests on the Feb build:
First quick render on the W7/GTX980 machine, renders no prob. Tried lowering the samples as per your 20% comment, can’t see any difference in my results - looking close but not microscopic inspection!
1280x720, 100%, 300 samples = 8 mins
1280x720, 100%, 250 samples = 6m 35secs
As for the Win10/GTX970 machine - it works fine! Don’t know what caused the previous issues, but this time i F12 w/ the full settings (1280x720 at 100%, 300 samples) and it just tore through it in under 7 mins (sorry, didn’t time it, was just please it was working). Thought it was playing w/ me at first, got right to the end and closed Blender, but then i noticed Windows was doing some update thing so maybe that messed w/ it, the next time i tried a render, all was good.
Edit - just for clarity, my 970 isn’t overclocked so i obviously had a different issue to the above.