Things are always “light-years” with you and missing features in Bender compared to others apps .
Sure, Blender is weird about some stuff. Rendering is not an exception. You need to think of some really weird tricks to implement new engines support and not break their licensing. BI also has their reasons for not allowing more control over nodes due some security reasoning. It’s not great but it’s not a deal breaker most of the time.
I’d recommend instead of complaining how bad Blender is just do something about it. Two easy things come to mind:
Support the dev fund so BI can get more man power to solve these long standing issues.
At least form your complain in a constructive way with possible solution and present it to developers. Participate in rendering or any other module that bothers you. Blender is as good as you make it.
Thats not critic but a statement and my opinion. And yes I reported that things and many others. But this threat here is to speak about such stuff and I believe in the freedom of speech without getting remind of things that are logical.
Lightyears is an expression. And in Blender its like some stuff process extremely fast, and others doesn’t do a step in many years. Thats not so different to other software. Its just that people here shouldn’t be afraid to talk about it, because someone wants a long article with statistics and what ever. And an excuse every second line to please every one.
Its also not about judging blender. Hey the title says it all, doesn’t it?
Sorry Robert. Maybe I overreacted a bit. I just follow the Blender topic at Foundry forum (I have found memories of Modo but never going back to that) and your frequent there to point out how Blender is inferior to other DCCs. Which in my expirience is nowadays far from the truth.
What I see is the immense progression of Blender in all areas and drastic increase of quality and quantity of art produced with Blender.
I understand you have expectations for things to just be better. Unfortunately, with FOSS it’s not that easy as I’ve learned the hard way. The best way to invoke the change is to help BI make the right decisions by participating.
Octane integration will also get better. There are quite a few things happening in this space. We just might need to wait a bit but it’s going to be even better. I am positive here.
The web is cruel, it list everything we said, even years ago.
Have to say, that the thing that changed Blender for me was Geometry nodes, its probably the biggest thing happening after 2.8. Deeply impressed.
But nothing is perfect. I just hope Blender has a brighter future then Modo had.
Do you in Octane for Modo see textures without rendering? In most 3D software you in viewport see what you will get in render… if you use native render. True every 3rd party render stretch his resource to support different software, different OS. I can talk only about C4D. During years I try or at least see how different renders work in reality. As far I remember no one give accurate representation of texture in viewport. Maybe something changes during years, but I remember in this way. This are not so big issue for people with powerful workstations, but mere mortals have hard time to adjust tiling, for example.
So this are not only Blender ‘issue’. Only solution are that ALL developers decide to make stuff more unified.
The beauty of Blender is the combination of Eevee and Cycles. You get both with the same shader model. I totally understand that this is a very important aspect of the software. If Octane shader would work with Eevee, it would be huge.
Still there is Vulcan coming and this will make Blender RT engine even better. Lets see what the integration of new Shaders bring.
As a personal experience I can say that Shader work is heavy when switching between render engines. I only know that Corona can deal with V-Ray Shader, but V-Ray can’t with Corona shader and converters are not really working that good. Haven’t see any software except Modo where developers tried to support the default render so accurate.
For example I just had the case of a few tree models. Bad luck for me, the artist didn’t used an atlas map and I had 15 shader per tree to redo. Thats takes time, especially when someone did tricks on offset, color correction, noise. It totally sucks if you have to spend an hour per tree and I ended up doing a comp in Fusion where I converted all leaves and flowers to a single atlas map. In the end, moving some UVs, but only having 3 shaders totally speed up the process. Its so sad, that developers never really care about this area. Hope that changes.
This is what MaterialX, USD and Hydra techs should solve long term. Now it’s very painful to move between render engines. You have to rebuild your assets. Or stick with one engine only.
I think this issue will be completely solved in a couple years. If you’ve seen the latest NVIDIA GTC conference where all major render engine CEO/CTE presented you’d see that it’s a shared vision of future. Vlado from Chaos specifically said that it won’t matter what engine you use in the future for mentioned above and other reasons. My guess it’s probably the reason why Chaos has brought all these companies focused on achvis industry to corner the market even more and protect their future.
By the way Octane has a material conversion option from Cycles shader nodes. But as with any other such convertor it’s only half decent and works for simpler material setups only.
I haven’t finished watching it yet, but there are some very cool features to have, if they get into Octane.
Just a few features that find interesting…
- Nanite native support in Octane, geometry streamed from an SSD so no vram limits for it.
- Similar to that is very large image support. If I remember correctly the example they show is for 128k X 128k.
- A time line for Octane development (but it’s still pretty vague).
- And many, many more than I can list here.
Yeah, there is a lot of great tech in this video. Some of the things are already 2021.1. Mostly minor things. I don’t know how much of the new tech will be available in the 2022 build but I am definitely looking forward to it.
I am very happy we have Octane in Blender. While Cycles is a very good engine the major industry renders are still far ahead in many aspects. It’s not totally fair to compare them of course because we have only a couple people working on Cycles compared to Octane, for example. Still, if you need more tools/power for your work it’s just good that we have an option.
And Octane is evolving in a very good direction. I’m very happy that they’re going to adapt Arnold’s Standard Surface model. It’s much easier to work with this shader than Octane’s Universal material.
Definitely looking forward for full mipmaping support. In fact you already can use .tx textures in Octane but there is no official news no this so I don’t know how much is this supported. But it works .
The nanite tech is really amazing. It can solve so many issues with RAM limitation and open up Octane even for more artists with lower specs. I believe Arnold already have something similar. It can do adaptive subdivision based on what camera sees. Great for saving resources when working with lots of displacements in a scene.
Octane is a really good render engine. I only wish it was a little bit more polished in Blender integration and that Otoy devs worked closer with BI to open up API more to make it possible for outside engines have a tighter integration with Blender. On par with what cycles have access to.
If only they supported Blender shader, or Blender stepped forward a better shader model. Hope MaterialX comes an solves it. But still Cycles has some real cool features dealing with shaders. But Otoy has so many areas they developing, hard to see a goal.
I am also happy Octane user. I find the node setup very simple. I was lazy how to learn Cycles properly. And for some reason things look nicer in Octane with less amount of time.
Yes they develop many things. I was discouraged sometimes when I got hyped by some roadmaps in Otoy’s development and things did not turn out as in a Youtube promo video. But I still stick to Octane, it is fast and simple. Plus you can use it across many other 3D apps. I cannot use Cycles in Houdini for example.
I think it all comes down to what you need, what is your workflow, and what is able to deliver best results in less time.
But if you decide to switch to Octane for blender, there are some annoying things which come up here and there
Totally agree. The best thing for me on Otoy is the package you get. Used Embergen for the first time, so cool!
I think they have a few short term big goals but ultimately they have one goal to be “the ultimate render platform”. The end point of visualization process.
Obviously every renderer is going for similar goal — market domination. But I’ll try to expand on what I mean here.
It’s good to compare Octane with V-Ray here in their public strategy. V-Ray is trying to keep it platform closed with its proprietary V-Ray file formats. Which are really useful allowing archviz artists changing DCCs easily and still load any assets fully shaded and converted to .vrscene files. This is a huge advantage of V-Ray since it has years and years of assets produced for 3ds Max + V-Ray. Makes it very hard (practically) impossible to change the renderer. It’s very interesting to see how they try to avoid opening up and moving in a different direction with cornering the market with company acquisitions in archviz niche.
Octane on the other, while also having it’s proprietary file formats, is moving in a different direction. It’s opening up it’s platform more. They’re making it possible to run other renderers through Hydra in Octane. Why is it important? Because of RNDR network Otoy successfully running. It’s a very easy access to a fast and affordable render power at any scale you need. As far as I’m aware a lot of people are using it and are very happy with the price and performance.
Octane is a great tool for Otoy to funnel client to RNDR network when they outgrow their local capacity for rendering. Also saving Octane users troubles thinking about local render farms or scaling those render farms. All the resources for that are available at the RNDR network.
This is why it’s a genius move to allow other render engines to work in Octane by fully supporting MaterialX, USD and Hydra. Once you’re in the Otoy ecosystem you have access to RNDR network. Otoy doesn’t lose anything but only gains by providing value of already working scalable render power to other engines and their users. I think Redshift is already a partner and Arnold is next.
So Octane for Otoy might be not the most important in this whole scheme. Of course it’s still important that Octane is great but I think RNDR network is where all the money will be for Otoy long term. At least it seems like it as of now.
They’re also exploring NFT but I know almost nothing about it to comment on it.
Eventually, if Otoy does everything right they might become the mega platform for rendering. Some kind of super farm and Octane will be one of the lead magnets for the platform.
I agree with everything you said here, also Jules has always said that Otoy’s overarching goal is to replicate the Star Trek holodeck. Octane is just a part of that goal.
I can confirm your contribution in this way.
OctaneRender™ for Blender plugin. Windows, and Linux versions. The download links, provided on this page, are for Enterprise License Holders.
OctaneRender Studio subscribers can access their software from the “Downloads” section of their Customer Account Page.
NEW FEATURES SINCE LAST RELEASE
- Set the Vignetting to 0 by default to match the Standalone
- Used the “new” nodes in the LiveDB as much as possible
FIXES SINCE LAST RELEASE
- Set the Vignetting to 0 by default to match the Standalone
- Used the “new” nodes in the LiveDB as much as possible
- Fixed the modified mesh data out-of-sync issue
- Fixed the mesh data out-of-sync issue under the edit mode
- Fixed the animation render issue when the Cycles’ “Persistent Data” feature is on
- Fixed the “Quick-Add” feature for the Toon Ramp textures
- Fixed “VR Scene Inspector” addon traceback
You can read about new features of OctaneRender™ 2021.1.4 here:
This is another maintenance release of 2021.1, which fixes more bugs and issues.
You can find an overview of all new features and improvements of version 2021.1 here.
This version supports all current NVIDIA GPUs with compute model 3.5 or higher. Please make sure to use a NVIDIA Studio driver with version at least 456.38 on Windows or 455.23 on Linux.
Changes since OctaneRender 2021.1.4:
- Added new option to toggle bump/normal mapping for the ambient occlusion AOV.
- Added option to the volume Z depth AOVs that allows you define which depth is considered white (1).
- Added new pin Input axes to the vertex displacement node which provides the ability to choose between different ways how the XYZ coordinates of a vector map should be interpreted in object space. This may be particularly important if your source application works in a left handed coordinate system.
- Fixed an issue where SSS + fake shadow enabled was rendering too dark when it sits inside another specular material that has fake shadow enabled.
- Fixed Vectron geometry becoming invisible if the bounds pin is unconnected. We now use the default bounds in that case which are 10m x 10m x 10x.
- The Bounds input of Vectron nodes doesn’t allow negative values anymore and will be clamped at 0. Old scenes with negative values are converted to use very large bounds.
- Fixed another case of SSS being a bit too bright with nested dielectric.
- Fixed incorrect material rendering if RTX is disabled, nested dielectrics are enabled and you move the camera.
- Fixed incorrect rendering of Vectron geometry.
- Fixed texture projections on SDF objects (Vectron and Volume SDFs).
- Fixed a bug where auto bump map doesn’t work as expected when box projection is used.
- Fixed object layer masks of volumes which were messing up custom AOVs.
- Fixed a crash during loading an USD scene that contains curves.
- Fixed random net render hang when no local GPUs are used for rendering.
- Fixed render error when using the baking camera with a baking group ID with empty UV data.
- Fixed issue requiring you to re-login when switching versions of Octane on some Linux distros.
- Fixed issue on Windows causing an ORBX file corruption when updating files on remote drives that have been temporarily disconnected (for example by having the computer go to sleep) - see viewtopic.php?f=9&t=79720 for a discussion of the issue.
- Standalone: Fixed potential crash while loading a new project.
- Standalone: Fixed a crash which happens when triggering an export in the geometry exporter with an invalid path (like an ORBX package) or relative paths. Relative paths are now anchored relative to the project directory if a project exist, otherwise relative to the current working directory.
- Standalone: When we relink the inputs of a scripted graph we take now the order and the type of linker nodes into account to resolve duplicate names.
What’s the right way to install a new version? Should I first uninstall the old “Blender Octane Edition” and “OctaneServer Prime”, or can I simply install the newer versions of those two and it’ll automatically install the new ones and delete whatever old files are left behind? I’m using the free tier by the way.
It’s going to depend on which OS you are using. I just install over the old version, but I’m on Linux (Mint 21) so YMMV.