That’s a weird logic. So instead of moving on to a newer, modern render engine within the same environment,
you choose to learn a completely new 3d package instead?
I think we should bring Blender Internal for Kickstarter to go on it’s own course of development in B3D 2.8. Maybe there is not enough people and the budget for it’s further development becuase there is a lot of work going on now in other parts.
But I want Blender Internal to flourish past 2.8x.
Maybe to take similar path as Forward+ (https://github.com/bcrusco/Forward-Plus-Renderer) or SEGI (http://www.sonicether.com/segi/) but running with Vulcan or OpenGL.
I don’t know why people are so attached to BI, it’s an old renderer, it’s usefull for some type of render, but the new viewport should be much better.
If blender wants to evolve it has to remove old parts and make new ones much better.
Will viewport render operate similar way as Internal operates light lamps, surface, volume and halo materials?
Hi, maybe take another view to the GLSL PBR shader system from Mr. Foucault, as far as I know he is involved at 2.8 viewport development.
I work with BI for a long time but it is getting outdated when you look at viewport performance from Maya.
No need to render anything with a scanline render.
Cheers, mib
Why does it have to be real time for SSS? An OGL/Vulkan/Similar ‘real time’ render can have the ability to render a frame at higher quality than games, given you don’t need to keep the FPS at min 30/60… Why not take 2 seconds for a frame and do a far higher quality SSS for example? (I would think something like this could be done??)
It doesn´t, and I´m not interested in arguing with people who don´t read what I wrote. FWIW, I really don´t care for BI (cycles all the way here), I just don´t like people misrepresenting facts, and I do understand people who want to keep BI. That said, I´m out and you guys can go on bickering all you want.
I did read what you wrote, and I don’t really see how I was misrepresenting facts. To be honest whilst I do believe that BI will be fully superseded by ‘real time’ renderers I don’t see why it should be removed before that time occurs. Secondly, there is a difference between achieveable via real time rendering, and actually implemented in Blender as well 
I appreciate the discussion. I have used cycles, but it is slow, and unless you need photo-real, which I don’t, it is over-kill and doesn’t have the aspects I value in BI. I know that it is ‘old’ fine, but try doing non-photo realistic animation renders with lines. You will get an approximation with the Viewport, but I need rendered sequences. And line work for anima and artistic animation. Freestyle works, but it is slow, doesn’t allow any preview, so the cycle of going back and forth, with renders, wait for it… then tweak… Recently I have had to go back to Lightwave. There I can get a VPR window, near realtime, with lines quality changes on screen as soon as I tweak a node, then render fast, by turning off GI and cel shade, with lines. I want to see this being possible in Blender. The BEER project promised as much, I helped fund it, but it is ‘stalled’ so now you know my discontent. This is not to say that I don’t appreciate the fine work by the developers and the great progress, total thumbs up, by my little corner of the world got no love on this release. Just sayin’ but love the effort, by the whole team.
That’s only true if you stick mainly to the legacy scanline features, add the more advanced raytraced features such as blurry reflections and the slowdown will be immense. Add millions of polygons on top of that and you see just how poorly the engine scales up (unlike Cycles where the amount of geometry is a non-issue speedwise once the render gets going).
You can verify that Cycles is faster (even with the higher level of realism) by configuring it so it has similarities with BI (ie. setting the number of diffuse bounces to 0 and turning the caustics off).
But, Are you talking about a feature that blender don’t have right now, no?
The NPR part and other fast artistic noiseless solutions are what interest me most… which is so tedious with Cycles (IMO, NPR shouldn’t be part of).
Ain’t it arrogant & ignorant (as rich snobs & poor in mind do) to throw old things away? Common sense is to recycle, evolve, rejuvenate the seed, the core, the code, the gene… i.e. NVidia’s MentalRay continues to further exploit high tech advances on GPU.
About Blender, greatest thing is the code stays available for everyone to use… love the open source with madness allowed.
I understand your point of view, but when developers make that it’s because they cannot recicle all the parts of blender because they don’t have enough time. I don’t think that they want erase sequencer or gameengine because are old.
3Ds Max are the different way, a software that never update nothing, all the old scripts stay in the same site 15 years ago. And for that reason 3dsmax don’t work for the vast mayority of the people that use blender.
just a clarification: afaik, BI is the only thing that the devs are considering removing with 2.8. 2.8 is not about removing, it’s about trying to make a clean slate.
In fact, the only thing that was actually removed in 2.8 branch is particles stuff.
BI, BGE and VSE are still there. No clear and detailed proposition to remove or to replace one of them have been written, yet.
Currently, no dev has expressed a serious plan of what should happen in those areas.
You can verify that Cycles is faster (even with the higher level of realism) by configuring it so it has similarities with BI (ie. setting the number of diffuse bounces to 0 and turning the caustics off).
I did and, although also Brecht suggested to do so, Cycles still.is.slower.than.B.I. (at least on my machine).
The more advanced raytracing features you talk about and available in Cycles can be “faked” in BI (even if not with the same exact results, of course), you only need to know how to do it.
Look, I’m not saying that everyone should forget about Cycles and go back to BI learning the more difficult way to make a good CG image, I’m just saying that maybe not everyone inside the Blender community like the idea of the Blender Render engine totally removed.
Some also can be “faked” and rendered faster in a Cycles render and others in a Viewport render.
It is hard to affirm that you will want to keep BI after new viewport shading abilities establishment.
You could not evaluate what has not been done, yet. So, you can not seriously confirm what you prefer.
One of the key things about Cycles is that it allows artists to focus more on being artists rather than technicians (so no having to spend a lot of time mucking about with bounce lights, environmental maps, and shaders that work in many different lighting configurations).
Like has been said before, you spend more time rendering, but that is using time that used to be spent on the scene setup. Besides that, all of the big software solutions are trending towards pathtracing engines as their main means of producing output (not to mention that is where the industry as a whole is going in general).
Well, in reality is nothing, no tool truly artistic friendly… it only comes after simplification is introduced, so it’s made on predefined standardized solutions (i.e. photography based) or custom made. Otherwise every tool must first be understood, known, familiar to artist. Even if hard to use or a pure engineering marvel. That’s the point of mastering artistry. Button pusher will never be an artist. Best of what developers can do for a user (quasi-artist) is to have clearly defined use/workflow based on practical standard experience with huge and well documented, indexed libraries of presets (here’s where you save time and knowledge, skill based on experience). Think of what would happen if suddenly electric cars would have acceleration and brake pedals switched or a steering wheel function reversed.
I highly hope and believe that all known BI tools with similar techniques&methods can be translated to run almost RT on GPU, but that’s some freaking huge amount of work.
IMO… 2.79 would be needed to cater for better transition, bug hunting and mostly GUI & UX madness. Only in dreams i hope for a year to be enough.
Dont the developers decide what to keep, and what to remove?
if the devs think that BI is very hard to maintain in its current state, and it will probably be harder to maintain with all the changes/refactoring in 2.8. Unless new developers step up, why shouldnt they remove it?
BI has been patched and stitched up for long enough. The best way forward (to me) seems easier without old/outdated features.
Blender cant keep all the features around, and has removed Some here and there in the past. 2.8 will be a huge step, and removing BI isnt and easy decision, but looking at the big picture (instead of looking at your personal needs) is the best way to go forward.