Hi, this work was made to prove that u don’t need crazy computer to make complex sceens. It was entirly done on old laptop with i5 2 core 3210M and 16 gigs of ram. I bought this laptop for 400$ back in 2013 if i remember right.
so generally speking the tank and most of the assets where done in Blender. The rest was done in Houdini and the whole project was rendered in clarisse.
Hi Kramon,
There is power. It’s look great!
thx bro!! the project was a blast
Double impressive to get that quality on such a laptop! (though 16 gig i’n’t bad - maybe I should be saying how did y get such a laptop so cheap?)
I featured you on BlenderNation, enjoy 
PS in your post in ArtStation you talk about that you are blown away by the software. DId you mean BLender or Houdini? Probably Houdini i guess.
Edit
nevermind, i didnt check the title really well… “Clarisse:” 
PS that is quite an expensive renderer by the way! never heard if this one before.
Reminds me of Crysis.
$999 a year for an indie/freelance user, then $249 a year. $59 for students. I don’t know. I rather buy 64GB of RAM for that kind of money.
Awesome render btw. Looks great.
Clarisse isn’t just a renderer. It’s used in feature film as a “Content HUB” for everything. It’s a scene builder to combine Houdini, Maya etc for rendering and compositing. It can handle billions of polys without proxys, USD import, ziva fur, extreme fast volumes and much more.
Looks great for for massive render projects but for an indie license I don’t see the benefit. Can a single person make that huge of environments as in the videos. I was thinking for an indie artist more RAM is better suitable instead of a renderer. However the renderer seems to be amazing compared to competition.
Yeah, as a matter of fact, one person can make such a huge environment all by himself.
But don’t think of Clarisse as only a renderer, its more like Katana. A tool for scene building, look-development, lighting, shading and rendering. The tool that sits at the end of the pipeline, dealing with everything the artists throw at it.
Since it doesn’t load the meshes directly (into RAM) but in an deferred way (from Disk) you can render billions (even trillions) of poly’s without Clarisse getting into a sweat. Because of that you don’t even need huge amounts of RAM.
Its really a nice and solid modern pipeline tool which makes the work on huge scenes easy and as such it is great for big and small studios, even single freelancers/artist can use it effectively.
I am surprised that it isn’t a household name by now. It really made/makes huge waves in the VFX community.
BTW. Nice work OP! How long was the rendertime?
amazing work man !!!
Are you sure they are not proxies. I believe i read somewhere the reason it so fast because everything is basically a proxy
the prev render was around 1H on 2 core 2.8ghz i5 3210M
the finall render was around 4-5H. on threadripper the render would probably take 15-30min max.
without denoiseing. the 1H render was ready for denoiseing. Also just few days ago 4.0 version droped with adaptive sampling of AA so that also would cut times.
yes the program basicaly is just combining path to files on harddriver that is why the tank i modeled in blender. tooks in blender 9 gigs of ram. and in clarisse just under 500mb.
also i had few bilion of polygons displayed in viewport at it runs smooth 30FPS.
even if u will buy 64 gigs of ram… Blender or Houdini or any other DCC appp will simply not work as smooth as clarisse and not that problem free.
Is clarisse for indie/freelance person a solution i think that depends u know. i already know Blender and Houdini so… learning clarisse was just another app in portfolio… and i loved it so much that for huge sceens it is acctually really good idea to use it.
i hope Blender 2.8 will get better at handling big stuff… i mean i have done in blender also huge stuff in past. but in clarisse it is just like rendering a cube.
Ps how is the model than represented in the viewport? Does it get some kind of remeshed version orso? I mean if it simply links the original it would not mean any difference to when using a single model.
it is referenced from disc or loaded. The viewport is raytraceing all the time. like cycles. so it dosn’t matter how much stuff there is in it because it will work smooth anyway. the diff is. that cycles can only raytrace like rendering stage. and clarisse raytrace like clay view wireframe view etc. and displays gizmo on top of that.
Blender have kinda similar technology. if u have object in one blender. just save the file open other blender. and simply link the object to your from blender from the one u saved. it will work very similar. However… clarisse have way way more better optymalizations and 1M polygon in clrisse is tottaly diffrent compared to 1M polygon in Blender.
Also clarisse was writted with multithreading in mind every single thing in this app is multi threaded if it is not possible to make something multi it will be not implemented. this is for example reason why clarisse dosn’t support fbx. because fbx can be only single core.
also because of raytraceing if u apply displacment on something it is displayed instantly at final form same is with bumps and normal maps… and if u add for example scatter to scatter tree u can tell scatter to scatter on surface of the displacment.
Why can FBX only be a single core, doesnt that depend on the code? I mean other formats is also simply code and function on how to read it.
Im no coder guru, but im not so sure that FBX cant be multi-threaded.
