I miss raytrace rendering with indirect lighting :(

Hey everyone,

Can we please get a build of 2.59 with the indirect lighting re-enabled in raytrace rendering?
It let’s me do nice renders like this in 2.5 minutes with blender internal (in blender 2.52.13) :

I know I could just use an old version of Blender, but where’s the fun in that? I never understood why they turned it off in the first place anyway, I mean sure it failed sometimes but for me 9 times out of 10 it’s flawless, noise free and ridiculously fast.

Btw, that’s one overhead sun, and one emissive material…

3 minute render in Blender (2.52) Internal :


im with ya on this. I’ve asked for it aswell, but since cycles is coming up, no one will probably care about internal anymore.

Guess which one has raytraced indirect lighting?



count me in, maybe we could form a group and make some pressure to add this feature again?

I sign this petition.

Why do we need a petition for this feature when it will just go out with the rest of the BI engine as Cycles becomes a fully production ready engine that has the same feature set that BI has, but does them better and with the addition of physically accurate GI?

I’d rather see the work be done in implementing the rest of BI’s features into Cycles as well as optimizing the GI system.

Hey Ace, do you have any ETA of Cycles as Blender’s standard rendering engine?

(And I agree with you there. When Cycles gets all the usual Blender functionality, you’ll see a whole new ballgame in the cult status of Blender. I’m mixing up the KoolAid as we speak!:p)

Oh, and Blenderer I LOVE this set! It would be a PERFECT starship bridge!

Or maybe when they are halfway with cycles, they will change their mind and start all over again with another render engine an we’ll have to wait another couple of years, like it has happened with blender 25.
What’s really frustrating is that Blender 25 was nearly finished, was fast, animation friendly, was used for the open movie to showcase it to the whole world, just to dissapear forever! and it was damn fast and with clean results. You have to wait forever with cycles for a clean image, and many of us can’t even use the gpu for rendering. I really was an elegant solution for GI, I miss it so much, why not include it, like we have AAO and “Aproximate Indirect Lighting”?

Blenderer, i also really liked having the option of raytraced indirect lighting in BI (and don’t really like having to go to a 2.53 build to play with it!) but i felt like it was almost oppressively slow with a high enough sample count to smooth out the graininess. what settings are you using that you’re getting such clean renders in 2 minutes, or may i ask what your system specs are, if that’s not being too nosy?

Re Adam:

Thanks :slight_smile:

Re ohsnapitsjoel:

My specs are:

  • ATI Radeon 5770 (2GB)
  • i7 2600 @ 3.5GHz
  • 8GB of Ram

The speed of those renders is because of the sun lamp shining in the cockpit window though, the more light there is in your scene, the better (and quicker) its render will be. Another tip is to remove ALL raytrace reflections from your scene they’re a complete killer for render speed. Use a spherical environment texture in the reflection channel of a material to fake reflection instead. Here are some renders of morgan on the bridge with some stats baked into them:




That’s SSS making her skin glow nicely, and it’s one of the main reasons I’ve gone back to BI from cycles. The other reasons are no sun lamp, and takes FOREVER to render noise out of large dark interiors.

Speaking of which here’s a render from the cargo bay, this one took 17 minutes at 128 samples because it’s so dark (which is the look I want):


And just for a bit of fun, here is the music I’ve made for my short…

Why do we need a petition for this feature when it will just go out with the rest of the BI engine as Cycles becomes a fully production ready engine that has the same feature set that BI has, but does them better and with the addition of physically accurate GI?

I’d rather see the work be done in implementing the rest of BI’s features into Cycles as well as optimizing the GI system.

I would not like the idea of having one awesome still-frame renderer, and one totally crappy animation renderer. We should not abandon BI and let it fall into disrepair.

I think Cycles is not intended to be a still-only rendering engine, not at all indeed.

I like cycles, but I could leave it running all night on that dark scene above, and in the morning it would STILL be noisy :frowning:

I urge people to check out Arnold Render, especially if they’re worried about Cycles not being fit for animation. I imagine it’s where Cycles will be in the future.

Cycle is already usable but not enough for serious production. Do you really do vfx without smoke (volume) particles rendering and maybe fur, SSS for organics etc. I Hope that project Mango will use “Sintel-ray” and improve it pending Cycle become production-ready.
Sintel-ray for 2.6 yaaay !!!
I sign the petition too

I think Cycles is not intended to be a still-only rendering engine, not at all indeed.

While lightyears faster than Luxrender, it can take hours to get rid of that last stupid firefly. I don’t mind that for stills, but imagine that for an animation.

The main reason why the render25 branch was abandoned was that it was found that refactoring the old, hacky code base would be about just as much or even more work than just creating a new, modern engine from scratch, I wouldn’t say it was a complete waste of time though, it may have actually helped Brecht and the rest of the team realize what direction they may need to go in if Blender is to get a modern, professional-grade render engine.

When you look at the design for Cycles and the roadmap, I have doubts that they will just scrap it and start over with a new engine candidate, the Cycles engine itself has an architecture which should be able to allow it to contain GI algorithms that is friendly for animation as well as offering faster GI algorithms and faster path-based lighting for stills. Cycles also has a new material system that is entirely node-based and also has the concept of combining various material traits for extreme control over the final result rather than just piling it all into a shader stack (and before you ask about the difficulty of nodes, the enhanced functionality for group nodes would probably allow someone to share something like a real big all-in-one shader where you only have to tweak the settings because the node tree has been done for you).

Despite the want to see the GI used in Sintel used instead, do note that it has limitations, the noise-free aspect was largely limited to just one bounce, there were no caustics, the SSS shading could not allow light to truly scatter through an object and affect the lighting on the other side ect…

I’ll try put it simple:

-To this day, Still no GI in Blender trunk.
-Blender 25 (used for rendering Sintel): almost finished, fast, used for Sintel, simple to use.
-As Ton says “Blender is for Blender users”, so we, Blender users want blender 25 back.
-Why can’t we have GI while waiting for cycles? there are other half developed features merged in trunk, why no GI!
-All proffesional 3d packages have some kind of GI on their renderers. They have it, and are not waiting for them.
-Better to have it than not to have it, it only costs merging it.
-It’s 2011.

Why don’t we gather here and do something to be heard? I’m propposing to do something about this, let’s discuss how can we be heard and what can we do to bring GI back, our objective is just to make Blender 25 merged into trunk at lest until Cycles is ready, is that asking too much? I guess it is, since the software is free an we are “nobody” to decide wich features must be included on it, but let’s try!!!

i agree that the indirect lighting option was nice, and it’s only my own humble personal opinion that blender should always have a scanline renderer (are there 3D packages that don’t? i’m actually curious, as i only know for sure about maya, max and blender) and that it’d be great to have some real - if limited in some ways - GI options in the scanline renderer, but it’s also my own humble personal opinion that Ton and the devs don’t owe us anything (unless, maybe, we’ve donated sizeable sums of money) :confused: they’re very generous for providing us with an amazing and free 3D package. anything they give us is due to their impressive generosity! i’d also like to see the raytraced indirect lighting option in trunk (whether as a temporary measure until Cycles is ready for production, or as a permanent thing in hopes that BI will last as an alternative to Cycles for those who want it) but if the community’s going to ask for that, i think it needs to be careful how it asks for that, and it would be best for everyone involved to ask and not demand. :wink:

Blenderer, i guess it doesn’t hurt that you’re rendering on an i7, cause i’m using a quad core with some decent but not necessarily beefy specs and i can’t seem to get a decent render under about 5 minutes even with plenty of light in the scene. guess i need to look at upgrades soon!