I don’t know about Blender Foundation. And that was answer of one of coders. May be him do not know nothing about your communication.
Sorry, i do not want insulting you. I’m only care that if i paid for E-cycles and my main intention was make this code available for official Blender builds sooner or later, I want to know that you fulfill your promise.
So from your side, probably was better made some public announcement that as you promised, you sent first patches.
Of course for me it’s better to make it public, but now it may put a lot of pressure on devs who are already mostly in burnout. Look at the commit logs of the paid devs (some hardly do 2 small commits per week. And the number of bugs on the tracker… it goes down since some weeks (very good) but it’s also because they are allowed to close as “not a bug” a lot more, the mountain of work is still there. I’m not sure having more people pushing for integration is a good Idea.
E-Cycles is made for NVidia cards only. The foundation has to make it good for everyone. E-Cycles back in January had a lot of bugs, the foundation maybe wants a stable version of the code. So I thought it’s better to discuss it quietly.
But looking at how the Blender Foundation handles me in the back…
Mathieu,
Their is no need to send patches directly to Blender Foundation.
What I was expecting is for patches that are over year old in E-Cycles to be submitted publicly at differential patch section from the Blender developer section at https://developer.blender.org/differential/.
That is where developers that do not work directly with the Blender Foundation can submit their patches to be added to Blender. E-Cycles has also used patches from that section.
Obviously their is no guarantee that those patches will be included in Blender. This way developers and users can discuss it publicly the benefits of adding these year old E-Cycles patches to Blender.
To be honest I’m fed up of heated debates in this thread or any other where I’m still getting questions like “When you planning start fulfill your promise?” clearly made as if I was the problem. I don’t want nor promised to spend time on discussing the if and how and when and maybe and why not nor having to endure lies nor suspission.
I send the code and I will now concentrate on making E-Cycles better for my users in 2020.
Isn’t just you that are the heated voice right now ? 
I meant that if I open a new thing publicly on the tracker, it may quickly become heated (from experience in this thread, look at the post of some months ago).
I think it’s normal to be upset by lies said in my back and by the fact that those were directly taken as truth without fact checking. The German law also agrees with me as it’s actually legally forbidden here to do defamation.
Mathieu,
Their has not being any heated discussion by other users and myself. It is fair to ask what happen to your original statement that patches would be available after one year. I know that it was one of the reasons why I supported your products because after one year the whole Blender community could benefit.
Having a patch summitted to the blender tracker doesn’t created heated discussion. The patch is their for developers and users to test and evaluated the benefits. If patch performs well and is useful it would be quite appreciated.
Hi, it is always fair to ask.
@jesterKing is one of the development manager of Blender Foundation and if he ask for privacy I think it is legit to do so. At least for some time.
Nothing work without BF in Blender development, give it some time.
Mathieu can publish to the official tracker and/or github if there is no movement from BF at some point anyway.
Cheers, mib
And since the code is GPL licensed, any E-Cycles customer would be legally entitled to submit the patches to the Blender tracker themselves, if they feel like things aren’t happening fast enough.
The moral aspects of submitting other people’s code, on the other hand…
Hey,
I did not notice the discussion in this thread until today. For discussion on code and further steps it is always best to directly write to me via e-mail as you did.
Hi @bliblubli,
I said that I had received the code dump and that it looks intact.
You indeed did send me the code. I had written you a reply already earlier, but had not sent it yet as I was double-checking about the licensing. I then forgot to actually send you the e-mail, for which I apologize. I did send you the e-mail last weekend though.
At all times, if you feel response is taking time you should just ping me personally on my e-mail.
I’d prefer we continue discussion in private, since the particulars are not necessary to air in public. But to iterate my requests regarding the patch work: 1) make sure that all Cycles-related patches are under Apache 2 license, 2) send me at least a diff + sha1 from which it was created.
Any code patches under intern/cycles that is not licensed as Apache 2 cannot be considered for inclusion.
Anyway, eagerly awaiting your response in my inbox.
Thanks for confirming I send the code and you received it. The next time another rumors is launched even if it’s again from an official Blender/Cycles developer, I will ignore it.
E-Cycles was used in a Toshiba animation. Jesse Henning, the artists behind it rendered it 100% locally instead of using a render farm. He explains all the benefits in the E-Cycles ratings section.
You can read more about his work here.
He is also using it for a short film in 4K, fully path traced with E-Cycles at 90 seconds per frames, also locally. Thanks a lot Jesse for sharing!
Hi!
I am having problem with Optix and rendering 4K images. I have two 2080Ti and I render with both of them. When I set the resolution to 4K (1080p works fine), it starts rendering and when I get first tile rendered one of the gpu-s disengages and the render time skyrockets although one of the gpu-s still has 100% load. If I use only one gpu everything works fine.
Now here is the weird part. That happened when I was using E-cycles 2.81a, so I tried 2.83. Everything worked fine. Until this morning when I had to do clean reinstall of nvidia studio drivers. Now there’s a problem even with 2.83 version.
Has anyone encountered similar problem?
Btw. what is your experience with latest studio drivers 441.66? On my system they behave awfully. Every now and then they come crashing down. No error message displayed just the whole system slows down unbearably to the point I have to do hard reset. That’s why I reinstall them often. It seems that most of the crashes happen during switching displays (monitor < > tv).
Probably the card you are using for OS/GUI/monitor running out of memory. Get the third card just for GUI.
That was my first guess. However I don’t get how come it worked on fresh version of Blender.
Btw. doesn’t E-cycles have out of core memory gpu rendering, same as standard Cycles?
My scene is not that big. I think that peak memory when rendering is around 14GB.
EDIT: Looks like I found it. Adaptive subdivision was to blame. Makes sense.
E-Cycles also supports out of core memory. Recently, RTX version is also supported.
Hey @jesterKing
yes of course, it’s just that I’m currently over busy so it will take a bit more time.
Generally, I recommend the v436 driver for the RTX version and I also recommend to use the standard version of the driver (not the studio one). Newer versions are slower anyway and 436 is very stable on top of being fast. Updating drivers should only be done if required. If it works, don’t fix it 
New build of E-Cycles are available for standard and RTX on Windows and Linux.
It’s based on 2.83, one bug is known: Material preview is black on some configurations/scenes. For those experiencing the issue, I recommend to stay on E-Cycles 2.82.