Stefano Strika

https://www.3dtutorialandbeyond.com/museumvray5/

Thanks;)

No mass exodus in archiviz, top CPU engine are there to remain, one year they may loose a small percentage but the year later they can regain that easily. RT engines are obviously gaining traction to complement CPU engines and I agree that there's a bright future for them, especially on the lower end, but as far as traditional GPU engine, well in archiviz they are not even in the top ten. Of course there are industries like motion graphic that are usually faster on GPU renderer, but it's not a general rule. Hollywood movies are not done on CPU because of large budget, people are still able to do simple math and if GPU engines were 10X faster for a fraction of the price you can be sure that they would adopt GPU very fast. This is not happening because even a simple driver update may screw up their work on GPU and the more complex the stuff is the slower the GPU become compared to CPU, and I'm not talking about memory issues... today you can couple two A6000 ad get almost 100GB of VRAM so the problem is not there most of the time. GPU engines someday will be on par with CPU engines as far as RAM, stability, versatility etc, but when that day will come RT engines will be able to do the same stuff even faster, as said leaving traditional GPU engine in an odd position. I don't pretend to foresee the future and I may be wrong, time will tell.. see you on this topic in another decade 🙂 one decade is already gone.

If you can make anything on GPU then why there no Hollywood blockbuster rendered with it? it's not only about Hollywood movies, even archiviz and other tasks are still mostly done on CPU engine while the lower end is moving to RT engines. For other tasks GPU will be plenty fast and faster than comparable CPU hardware, but again, despite people saying from a decade that CPU is dead, the real world prove that is not going anywhere.

and some other detail:

Hi everyone, I was testing a new build of the software and just to be sure that old files worked correctly I've played a bit with the museum scene posted a while back here on the forum. While playing inside the VFB I've tested a black and white mood, results seems interesting so I've decided to produce a full set of image. The look comes mostly from the frame buffer plus a bit of film grain added in PS. Let me know what you think;) More views:

After 10 years from your prediction CPU rendering its still here, it's the tool of choice for large production, plenty fast depending on your scene (even faster than GPU for many tasks) and nowhere near to be dead 🙂 GPU rendering have his place for sure and it's already faster in selected things but regardless of the predictions I can not see why it should be the future. IMO the future is real time engines for fast results, leaving CPU engines for heavy stuff, this will leave the traditional GPU engines in an odd place and they will need to adapt or converge to RT engine. Ther's also no guarantee that traditional hardware (CPU/GPU etc) will still be there in a decade, Apple already transitioned to SoC, Microsoft is trying to do the same with Qualcomm (other will follow), the fastest supercomputer already moved away from CPU/GPU distinction and is using an ARM SoC, enthusiast system will be the last to survive, I may be wrong of course 🙂

Seems interesting

Temperatures are something to be worry about when using Intel laptops, the machine is cool and virtually silent no matter what you throw at it.

I do not have Corona installed right now so I can not confirm, as far as I know there are large gains going from the Rosetta to the native UB version on M1 machines, seems to be larger gains compared to Vray, don't know if Corona was slower in Rosetta or just faster running native code though... regardless the Ultra should be a capable machine for CPU rendering, even competitive with similarly priced assembled Windows systems and for a fraction of the noise and power consumption.

Please do not take MaxTech too seriously, is very Mac biased and not a 3D guy, running synthetic benchmark is one thing, real work is quite a different one. We have a 16" MBP with a M1Pro(10coreCPU) and is already plenty capable for working in 3D, from our tests on real scenes is about as fast as a 12core Intel/AMD desktop machine, is safe to assume that the Ultra will be about twice as fast. here is a video I've recorded on the MBP, Vray now runs much faster since they fixed a few things including the interactive denoiser: I'm not sure the MP will be showed this summer, most likely for late 2022, it will probably use a smaller TSMC node that wont' be ready for the summer.

It should be simply twice as fast as an M1 Max, better to check with real scene (benchmarks are not native) with Vray or Corona though, in latest years I've seen singnifcative difference between Cinebench and other renderer.

No need to ask for anything, you should do a research about how much you can get from 1.000.000 Youtube views, it may surprise you 😉

I'm sorry if I seemed offensive, it was not not my intention. I'm not emotional at all about this, I just think that is naive to think that these people are rockstars and are going to change something in the 3D world (at least not the one you listed, really.. they are just average Youtubers with lots of views, nothing more). You say that Polyfjord is an "earth mover", among the people that are changing the 3D world, but honestly I fail to see even a single interesting video... that is not even average stuff (see attached image of the Youtube homepage). You really want me to think that this stuff deserve 2.5 million views??: You have indicated his success by the number of viewer but as showed even a big butt girl can do the same or better. There are very talented artists that do not have the same notoriety despite offering far better content but you should know that Youtube algorithms do not reward the best content, only the stuff (quite often mediocre stuff) that attract the most viewers, the more viewers the more money they get from advertising etc. Even in my video if I show a crappy tutorial I get a lot more views than the one obtained with more complex/informative video, this do not mean that the crappy tutorial is better and if I get more subscribers by making mediocre stuff that does not transform me in a rockstar 😉 BTW I don't like the work for my clients and I do not judge that art at all, it's just what my clients want and as a professional I'm trying to do my best to please them, if it was up to me they would all have minimal houses 😄 We have different view of the world we live, you are a top enthusiast and I'm on the opposite side of the spectrum since it's really hard to impress me, I'm fine with that 🙂

After your comment just out of curiosity I went to see the video (only a few seconds..), and no, ther's no PS in there 😉 My videos don't even reach 20.000 views, maybe I should hire that girls for my intro, then I'll be a rockstar too!

We have very different idea of what is deep and rich 🙂 and our world is not a Youtube 3D contest.... since crappy NTF are sold for the same money of a Picasso I guess people are getting out of touch from the reality more and more. I do not consider them top 3d artist. For me a top 3d artist is someone who can produce really stunning results, but beside Hubert those Youtubers are not even very good one to be honest. If we judge people by the number of visualizations then we must conclude that this girl is a genius (just a random video with 3 million visualizations):

I was just curios and I saw a few video from the pwnisher, those things are uninteresting basic crap and the fact that have tons of views only demonstrate that human race is becoming dumber at an impressive rate, when we start to judge somebody by the number of Youtube likes, there's something very wrong with the masses, that's for sure. Maybe I'm too old but if we talk about rockstar I still think about Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin etc, most of those guys are just Youtubers that will be forgotten as fast as they have reached notoriety. Sorry but I'm not impressed at all:)

I'm not sure if this is available in Corona too, on Vray for Cinema4D you should be able to import objects/scenes from Vray for Max as proxy including shaders etc (Cosmos assets are essentially Vray proxy).

I can not say anything specific about future release, I will just say that Chaos already have a great platform and the best is yet to come.

To be fair that's not a good comparison, that's not a "quality asset", those kind of websites offer crappy 3d models often stolen from old commercial library. Try to go on store like 3dsky, Designconnected, Turbosquid, CGtrader and similar and you will find tons of quality stuff that is native for Max/Vray/Corona and despite being offered also in obj/fbx you can be sure that Blender or Cinema imported model won't match that quality;)

I totally agree, I say enjoy the vast ecosystem not the software itself;) there's a very good reason why I use C4D. That being said the number of quality assets/plugin available for Max is unrivaled.

There are many issue in your file, my advice is to check some C4D bottle tutorial on YouTube, I'm sure you will find everything you need;)

If all you need are tons of ready assets then there's nothing better than Max + Vray or Corona. Both engines right now have access to the Cosmos library also in C4D, the library is growing every day and there are very interesting plans to expand the feature set. If you are in a hurry just start to use Max and enjoy the vast ecosystem, if you can wait a bit probably you will be fine also on C4D.

MD is mostly conceived for clothes, furniture, curtains and similar, but it can be used also for stuff like your plastic bag and many other things. It's the best tool in his class and an essential software for many CG artist, that's for sure. That being said I don't know your typical workflow and therefore I'm not sure if it's worth the money for you.

Here are some screenshots. Basically you need to model the interior shape in C4D and use it in Marvelous Designer as an avatar. In MD you draw the packaging patterns and then you stitch it together around the avatar, to shrink the top you can use the "elastic" parameter. Once you have your packaging shape you can import it in C4D and it will have perfect UV. Then you can add other details, you can use sculpting tools but I would simply use a deformer, I've do that for the bottle label and it worked nicely.