>Have to turn down sample count to 300>Have to use 8 trillion denoisers>Have to turn off EVERYTHING important>Moving a block 1 picometer recalculates the entire scene>All of this to generate graphics subpar to Unreal engine fucking 4 on a 16gb beast graphics card while taking 80000x longer. Modern animation renderers are fundementally broken and one of the WORST wastes of processing power ive ever seen. Its a fucking joke that it took until 2019 FOR GPU RENDERING TO BECOME STANDARD, Animation software would just use the CPU for everything until then. Unless you have a render farm your FUCKED and again you need a render farm just to generate graphics on par with Unreal engine 4.
>>108196582Im pissed and wrote this entire rant because I had to render a 47 second prototype animation today. I had to Set it to 480 FUCKING P and even at 480p this basic scene with NOTHING in it took ALL FUCKING NIGHT TO RENDER and when it came out it was messed up because of the AI denoisers not working at such low resolutions.Meanwhile a basic RTX 2070 graphics card could render this scene in unreal engine 4 at 1080p in REAL FUCKING TIME ray traced.
>>108196641I NOW have to set the sample count to 200 just to get a render speed that is ACCEPTABLE. as you see in the screenshot attached.
>anon learns that realtime renderers are faster than production renderers
>>108196582Did you turn on GPU rendering?
>>108196668yes I did.>>108196664Im not mad that its faster im mad that it produces the SAME and sometimes even better quailty than production renderers. Thats what pisses me off. Because like Game renderers have been using so many tricks to produce the same visuals and these render engines have used NONE of it. Cycles after finishing a frame throws away ALL the information it used and recalculates everything again. Ya dig?
>>108196681Almost like it tries to make each and every frame as realistic as possible so that you can use it for special effects or movies without people saying that it looks like it's from a videogame.
>>108196860Its fundementally bullshit.>Calculate the lightning data for one frame perfectly.>instead of using the data from before to form the next frame you THROW ALL THE INFORMATION AWAY AND CALCULATE EVERYTHING AGAIN And no. Ive seen UNREAL engine 4 produce the SAME fucking visuals as this.When I need a render farm to compete with visuals that can be created on a fucking consumer RTX 2070 or god forbid GTX 960 because we can make a case that you can create images with the same image quailty with non RT lighting with unreal engine 4 then yeah its a fundamental problem.
>>108196582>>108196641Maybe leave India and get a better PC Raj
>>108196916Look at what GAMES are able to achieve 60 times a FUCKING SECOND.
>>108196928I have 16 gbs of VRAM and 32gbs of ram on a Mini led 1440p monitor.
>>108196933And now look at the animation that took ALL NIGHT ON BLENDER compared to what games produce 60 times a second. LOOK AT HOW HORRIBLE THE VIDEO QUAILTY IS. THIS SHIT TOOK ALL NIGHT ON THE SAME MACHINE THAT PRODUCED THAT SCREENSHOT.
>>108196928Not that jeet, but I have a 9950X, 96GB of RAM, and a 4090 and I agree. It's ridiculous how outdated blender's renderer is. I think they understand it, because they're adding some features from real-time rendering like DLSS to blender 5.1+ There's a reason why studios are turning to Unreal Engine 5 to do background rendering. The main thing Unreal Engine is missing is complex physics simulations like Houdini and Maya (with bifrost). I guess technically you do it manually with Niagara and handmade shaders, but that's like reinventing what Houdini and Maya mostly provide out of the box/with purchases.
>>108196582Blender is free and as good as the others, go with that. It's also excessively documented by the project and the community also.
>>108196582>graphics subpar to Unreal engine fucking 4You're confused about quite a few things here.
>>108197104>>108196962>>108196933TELL ME this looks better. TELL me that spending ALL NIGHT to generate THAT is better than what a game is able to do 60 times a second in screenshot attached.TELL me thats efficient
>>108197178What looks better? Model something better and it will look better. Again, you're completely fucking confused about most of the shit you're trying to discuss here.
>>108197354Look at the visual quailty.It took ALL night to render ONE model. And even that model looks HORRIABLE once rendered into a video, the video was horriable because of denoisers and I had to set the resolution to 480p
Try increase sampling, lower the light paths, turn off reflective and refracting caustics and also clamp indirect lighting. Retard.
>>108197433Just don't be a noob, I guess.
>>108197474"Your confused"Again. Cycles is fundementally flawed. Imagine drawing a animation, you finish ONE frame right. And instead of using the data from the FIRST frame, you just THREW AWAY it and started that new frame COMPLETELY from scratch. Thats what cycles does. It calculates ALL the lighting data for everything the reflections and more, and then once done with the frame THROWS IT ALL AWAY and recalculates everything. This is a fundamental problem not with the code but with the PHILOSOPHY that as long as it exists will gatekeep most indie devs from ever making CG shots or animated trailers.
>rendering inside a 3d softwareJust throw you gray model scene in nano banana retard
>>108197558Even back in the day if you looked at animation from smaller companies that used medium sized render farms. They often looked worse than Half life 2. A game that ran on a single gaming computer. And its because the animation software they were using was fundementally flawed. When a single computer can produce better visuals in game than a medium sized render farm than something is FUCKED with your software. And even today in 2025 the aging philosophy back THEN is STILL used today unchanged. As games used more and more tricks to get closer and closer, animation software adopted NONE OF THOSE TRICKS. Using the same logic from the 90s. >Take one frame, render, go to the next frame, recalculate everything and renderThe fact that it took until 2019 for GPU rendering to become standard is a JOKE.
>>108196681Saar, do the needful and enable GPU ONLY rendering and activate "persistent data" from render settings.
>>108197631Epic saw in development of how FUCKED the animation scene was and started to make Unreal engine 3 more of a "Multi-purpose" tool not just for games. Thats why Unreal engine 3 was not showcased in a game but in a trailer FOR a game, and was really just a tech demo to show all the effects it can do.As unreal engine 4 rolled around Epic games was pretty much using it as marketing to indie animators and budget companies. The Fortnite trailer they made was actually not even a trailer for the game but rather a advertisement for Unreal engine in filmmaking with them using the trailer to make entire papers describing how Unreal engine can help with rendering.(Search up Unreal engine 4 fortnite trailer paper) they have a entire document showing this. I also believe that Fortnite was made to also show off that Unreal can not just be used to make realistic style games.>>108197667Again Lightning and MOST information still gets recalculated every fucking frame. and yes I do have GPU only
>>108197689This was before UE5 came in and FUCKED up unreal as a competent engine.
>>108196681>autist backpedals 4 posts inthe ol' reliable
>>108197739>backpedalsIm not backpedaling shit.
>>108196582If you don't like cycles because it take too rong use eevee then, it's realtime
>>108197783and EVEEE looks like SHIT. Fucking unity graphics look better than stock EVEEE.
keep in mind this is probably the troll from /3/ that has a turbo hard on for blender
>>108197830Who me OP. I don't HATE blender specifically I hate ALL of the big 3 animation softwares for doing the same thing im describing. I think blender is the best outta the 3 honestly.
>>108197869OP, check out Blender 5.1:>OptiX takes advantage of hardware ray-tracing acceleration in RTX graphics cards, for improved performance.>Hardware ray-tracing support is available with the most recent drivers. This can be enabled in the preferences, and is supported on Radeon RX 6000 and newer.
>>108197631The sampling tricks that UE5 uses also causes smearing and ghosting. Then they add framegen and dlss to paper over some of the problems (partially).I actually sympathize with some of this rant but I'm not looking forward to seeing animations also turn into smeared UE5 slop.
>>108198319Yeah UE5 sucks. Im talking about UE4
>>108196641>ray tracedvideo cards don't feature ray tracing. For it to actually be ray tracing there has to be convergence.
>>108197631>When a single computer can produce better visualsExcept they can't.
>>108197783Current problem with Eevee is that its realtime global illumination and reflections system is limited to screen space only, anything that's outside the viewing area will not be taken into account. Hopefully the move to Vulkan will one day allow Eevee to utilize full world space ray tracing.
>>108198422LOOK AT THE PHOTO I SHOWED YOU.And tell me it looks better than Hl2. Even if HL2 looked only 50% the quailty of a medium sized render farm the fact its running on ONE computer would still indicate that something is FUNDEMENTALLY wrong with the renderer.
>>108196582construct your scene better you troglodyte
>>108198592Its one FUCKING prop and a wall with some dust.
>>108196582Why can't we use UE4 for development? It's mature and performance does not suck as much.
>>108198544the screenshot has obvious artifacting, I don't know what you think you're seeing.
>>108198620Because modelling in blender and then importing in UE4 is a pain.. I hope though that in the future you could have game engines as plugins in blender and max that you can then use a renderers in the future.So imagine you could render a scene using the engine of Unreal Engine in blender instead of EVEEE or cycles.
>>108196941>AMDYou dumb motherfucker, you need nvidia with CUDA to render anything decent fast.
>>108198636Of course it is. Because HL2 is a game meant to be run at resolutions of 720p. 1080p is really pushing it. After 1080p the artifcating gets worse with that game.But also OTHER animations that took animation studios medium sized render farms were rendered at NTSC 480p.
>>108198674Well fuck ok. I couldve used my money to get a 8gb nvidia card or a 16gb AMD one. I chose AMD.
>>108198786Yeah that's probably a better option for gaming but nvidia and CUDA is what's necessary for pretty much anything work related because every good program uses CUDA.
>>108198864Fuck Cuda. Why the hell cant we just use Vulkan or Opengl or Directx. I mean Cyberpunk was the first game i played that had ray tracing and they created a solution that did not require ROCM or cuda or ANY of that stuff. It just WORKED. Now I have to install all of this and buy this just to get a subpar experience you know. Pisses me off
>>108196933>>108196962Like I really want you to LOOK at this image vs what takes blender a ENTIRE day to render.Look at the first image. Ray traced reflections, Motion blur(Still computationally expensive wheather it looks good or not), Ambience, Ray traced lighting and SSO, Denoising.All while running at 60 times a second and still managing the CORE game logic and stuff like physics and collisions and going at 140 miles per hour.Now look at blender on the SAME graphics card.>OH but blender is doing MORE work because it has to xyzThen WHY do XYZ? For decades since the 2000s Animation software has been designed for the BIG customers with huge render farms and never the little guys, Its dissapointing that blender makes the same mistakes as max and Maya. If you can produce the SAME image quailty using a alternate technique while being 800 times faster than no shit you should use it, Its undebatable. I have ONE fucking prop and a wall. For just 40 seconds of footage it takes almost 8 HOURS!!. Thats ABSURD compared to the other screenshot I provided. And no AI denoisers and OptiX will fix that. If the renderer is fundamentally broken/wrong then no amount of patches and small fixes will make the underlying problem go away.
>>108198885Different things, programs use different APIs and libraries to do different things and blender is just best with Optix and CUDA.
>>108198984I mean look at this. Look at what game engines are able to accomplish at 60 times a second at 1440p. All while Modern animation software in Blender still take 8 hours to render a single prop and wall 40 second animation at 480P!!. You see why im pissed. Like ever since Half life 2 game engines have been using SO many genius strats to get frame times as low as possible. Tricks that aren't even considered tricks but rather should be considered METHODS because of the time they save and the visual quality kept.
>>108199016And the REASON why 3ds max or maya NEVER caught up is because there BIGGEST customers were big animation studios with the money to buy out all there problems with HUGE render farms. Its crazy how blender with cycles went down the SAME route as 3ds max and maya despite not having the large expensive customer base as them. Eveee Tried but the image quality that Evee produces is just subpar to something like UE4 and Unity.
>>1081990353ds max in the early 2000s could had been best summed up as "complicant". There was a reason why people made SKETCHES of stuff perfectly before drawing with pen and paper or even made the THING in clay. Because lightwave, 3ds max all were HORRIABLE to use from a user interface standpoint. Like they were NIGHTMARES. Even blender in its early stages would have extreme input delay when doing FREECAM and you could not stop the freecam instead only being able to set it to speed 0 by scrolling down when you wanted to stop moving(This happens even on modern ryzen processors with ancient versions of blender).Do you know how FUCKED you have to mess up the user interface to where making stuff with CLAY would be more intutive than using your modelling software. Even taking away the rendering aspect.
>>108199016You do realize that you're comparing completely different things right?
>>108196582Actually, why *not* use Unreal Engine for animation? If you're an independent artist rendering on just a single GPU, you could probably save many hours rendering compared to a traditional path-traced renderer.
>>108199071What exactly makes my argument wrong?If you had tech that was able to render stuff 800x faster while still keeping the visual quality would using even one TENTH of the techniques there be a "Absurd" idea.
>>108199079Its mostly complicancy for me. You use Blender. And then you cant imagine it any other way. Or where learning something new now becomes HARDER. It truely is getting really good from what ive heard.
>>108199096They're completely different workload pipelines and also completely different quality it's not the same also it's probably not 800x faster your computer just sucks. Regardless professional CGI is done on machines more expensive than you could ever afford.
>>108199118"Completely different quailty"No its not. That was true 10 years ago. But quailty per watt its clear WHO wins. >OH but blender is doing MORE work because its a industry tool and has to do xyzI ask again Then WHY do XYZ? For decades since the 2000s Animation software has been designed for the BIG customers with huge render farms and never the little guys, Its dissapointing that blender makes the same mistakes as max and Maya. If you can produce the SAME image quailty using a alternate technique while being 800 times faster than no shit you should use it, Its undebatable. If animation software could just do 1/10 of what Game engines do to render things faster I would be happy. >>108199016>>108196933If these can run at 60 times a second with ray traced reflection, Ray traced lighting and SSO, and volumetric fog. Then Its not that insane to say "Maybe we should be implementing what these game engines are doing"Both of those screenshots were from the SAME system as what Im rendering.The REASON its expensive is because computational power is being WASTED on inefficient algorithms that throw away everything its worked on for EVERY single frame starting from scratch. THAT is the reason WHY I need a small render farm to render a 5 minute cycles animation at 1080p.
>>108199153You keep saying the same quality when they just aren't the same quality lmao. You can't just make up things and pretend to have a point.Also nothing of extreme high quality is running at 60 frames per second full RTX in UE5 lol. Not that it would matter in terms of film/rendering since that only needs 24fps.
>>108199169If you want to tell me that ONE prop I made in a SINGLE scene with a basic flat shaded WALL is the same quailty as >>108199016>>108196933And that spending ALL night waiting for THIS output is actually OK when other engines can produce visuals like THIS 60 times a second. Then your insane.
>>108196962>the video qualityYou are rendering to image sequences instead of rendering directly to video files, right?
>>108199188It doesn't matter what I use, the render time is INSANELY stupid for what is actually on screen compared to other things.
>>108199204What am I just suppose to stitch together every frame as a PNG into my video editor. Even still the Video quality is not the problem/why im mad. Well its part of it. But even if you were to solve it the core of what im getting at remains
>>108199184That's your fault not the programs lmfao.
In blender change in the system settings to OptixThen enable denoiserAlso there are people testing a blender build with DLSS.It is going to deliver EEVEE performance in viewport.
>>108199224He has an AMD gpu not an nvidia RTX gpu.
>>108199184Sounds like a you problem, here's a game asset I recreated as a test and it takes ~20 seconds to render it at 1920x1080 4096 samples.
>>108197793>and EVEEE looks like SHIT.You need to add a light volume in order to make EEVEE look good.
>>108199220>What am I just suppose to stitch together every frame as a PNG into my video editor.Not really, most decent video editors should be able to intelligently import image sequences as clips.https://helpx.adobe.com/premiere/desktop/organize-media/import-files/import-images-as-image-sequence.htmlIf you export to something like PNG, you don't have to wrestle with compression quality loss as you would exporting to H.264.
>>108199236>He has an AMD gpu not an nvidia RTX gpu.He bought the shitty gpu for rendering, and is complaining it sucks?
>>108199223HOW is it my fault. Really explain it to me. "The fundementally broken renderer that I went into detail about how many other engines DESTROY is not its fault because">>108199224Again. If the CORE of the renderer is busted No fixes like DLSS or OPTIX will remove the underlying problem.Calculating Lighting data, reflections and more, and then THROWING it away for the next frame to recalculate everything again is fundementally flawed. "Sounds like a you problem, here's a game asset I recreated as a test and it takes ~20 seconds to render it at 1920x1080 4096 samples."Again, try rendering a animation with that scotty. 5 minutes of footage should take you 8 years with those results.>>108199252
>>108199272Im not saying Blender should be EXACTLY like a game engine.Im saying that if 3ds Max, Maya, and blender implemented just 1/10 of the ideas and innovation that game engines have been using since 2004 it would make things ALOT easier at the rendering side. 1/10 is ALL im asking for.
>>108199268Yes lmao
>>108199284If I need more than a 16gb of VRAM graphics card to render SUCH a simple scene when that same card when used efficentily can render visuals like these 60 times a second>>108199016>>108199016Then thats a problem.
>>108197793Yeah, EEVEE was once very impressive when it was first unveiled around 2017 since the rendering quality was comparable to Unreal Engine 4 (pre-RT) at the time, but it's admittedly fallen behind today's realtime rendering engines in many respects. Now they did recently add screen-space ray tracing to EEVEE although the screen-space limitations do hold it back somewhat; I wonder if that's because there might be compatibility issues with OpenGL, but as I've said before, I hope that as the Vulkan backend matures enough for Blender to make it the default, we could see multi-bounce ray tracing come to EEVEE.
>>108199272Anon if it takes ~20seconds to render a frame it should take me about 40 minutes to render 5 minutes of footage not 8 years. Of course if I was making an animation I wouldn't use 4096 samples lol. It takes less than 4 seconds to render a frame at 128 samples which means it would take 8 minutes to render 5 minutes of footage.
>>108199305I would like to see that to.
>>108199184how does it take so long for you? This is with denoising, depth of field and post processing.Skill issue? I'm just a hobbyist, I bet there's a lot of potential for optimization
>>108199294Why do you not understand different APIs using different processes on different gpu architectures result in different rendering times? 16GB of vram is something to worry about much later in the process.
>>108199311>>108199323How the FUCK did you get that??? Bravo dude.>>108199325Then again I ask. WHY use those APIS if there so expensive compared to performance per watt. I mean if we can use something that FASTER and BETTER than why don't we use that. Just 1/10 of the solutions that game engines use would make Indie animating things alot easier in my opinion(yes I hate the word indie animation to it sounds very onions)
>>108199354>How the FUCK did you get that??? Bravo dude.I pressed render and didn't buy a literal garbage tier GPU?PS: Oops, had the wrong denoiser active :/
>>108199397I mean like you got my model down EXACTLY.Including all the imperfections(the camera angle made it seem like it was bent on the side which was not true as of here)>>108199354Like you even got the missing power button and black lighting bug correct.
>>108199414>I mean like you got my model down EXACTLY.I looked at yours and replicated. It's not a complicated model. I'm just a hobbyist, so it took me like 10 minutes
>>10819942510 MINUTES is absurd for that though.,I mean that shit took me a good while you know. I mean even the black lighting bug at the bottom is there.
>>108199438I thought the black bar was a feature, not a bug xDwhat about the render time?
>>108199479https://files.catbox.moe/qdwgn8.mp4its pretty fucking bad because its a video and its been going all day(just 54 seconds)
>>108199479PS the screen shader took by far the longest
>>108199498>https://files.catbox.moe/qdwgn8.mp4Wait thats the wrong footage lmao let me get the right one(thats the video file for the tv)https://files.catbox.moe/nx8pkn.mp4
>>108199501>>108199518OH MY GOSH BLENDER IS IT REALLY THAT HARD TO RENDER THIS THAT YOU NEED SO MANY HOURS
Idk doesn't seem that complicated.
>>108199531You wont BELIEVE THE FUCKING SETTINGS IM USING TO GET IT DOWN TO THIS LEVEL AND ITS BEEN RUNNING FOR 3 HOURS
>>108199532First off LOVE the ami screen. Second off. OH MY GOSH BLENDER WHY DO YOU HAVE TO TAKE 8 YEARS TO FINISH FOR ME. WHY DOES IT HAVE TO TAKE SO FUCKING LONGhttps://files.catbox.moe/nx8pkn.mp4
>>108199563Because your computer sucks man.
>>108199501I remember using blenders like material editor to make shader effects that id export as images to make like cool effects.(I wanted to make it like Halo 3 where like those hallucinations would happen)https://streamable.com/io4mwpI should really learn blenders like material editor again. because ive heard that the skys the limit with that thing.
>>108199501But thats a REALLY cool effect. Thanks for sharing man.
>>108199657https://files.catbox.moe/h364ex.mkvtook about 5 mins
>>108199669First off thats so accurate to mine that its acutally uncanny(Minus the polygons because im retarded and like don't use polygons that much).Second off. WHAT gpu do you have man? Im STILL rendering this shit.
>>1081996864090.Btw... have you actually USED unreal engine? Do you know how long it takes to PREPARE a game running at 60 fps in UE? Baking the lighting takes FOR FUCKING EVER in UE - I've dabbled in it and it was so fucking frustrating to work with because it just takes endless time to update stuff almost every time you touch something - Moved a light? Here's 5 minutes of baking time again - and that's with a 4090So the reason game engines can do this stuff is because SOME PC OUT THERE had to calculate all that stuff for you. Plus, they take soooo many shortcuts to make things run well - that's just not how an actual renderer works
>>108199716Yeah well I only have 600ws of power. And I only have 16gbs of VRAM and stuff. I just think if blender used 1/10 of the innovations game engines used it could render stuff alot faster. Not that blender should be a game engine. Just that maybe we should use SOME of the innovations by it.
>>108199733You keep blaming blender but it's your hardware anon.
>>108199583I HAVE A 16GB GRAPHICS CARD. THAT SHIT IS SO FAST THAT If I were to put my PP into that PERFECT 3 FAN GRAPIHCS CARD ID GET A ERECTION
>>108196582Which one would make STL files?
>>108199977Blender natively supports STL import & export.https://docs.blender.org/manual/en/5.0/files/import_export/stl.html
>>108199479>that fucking black hole at mesh of the base of the monitor Learn to optimize your shit you nigger
I mean I think my points still stand>>108197631 BUT I updated blender to 5.00 from like late 4.5 or something that I had from last october. Its slightly faster.
>>10819991416GB does equate to speed lmfao
>>108199016There is something fundamentally wrong in your scene if 480p tier resolution takes 40 seconds to render. At work I do some animation stuff with mobile GTX 3000 card and it usually takes approx 40 seconds to render a 4k frame with 160 samples.
>>108202718He's using an AMD gpu and keeps spouting that he has 16GB of ram as if it means something. He's a lost cause indian.
Just use eevee
>>108204051Ue4 looks fucking better than stock EVEEE.
>>108196582>use subdivision modifiers bro, you can see the end result sooner using less geometry>uses extra geometry on every edge so it doesn't look like fucking dogshit in the modifier3D modeling is so dumb sometimes lmao
>>108204051It wouldn't make a difference for OP
>>108205173Surprisingly enough I did not use that many polys. >>108199438
Waste of a thread.Go to /3/ and bother them.
>>108206592fuck u nigga
>>108206592no u
>>108198640you can already change renderers in blender
>>108196582git gud
>>108201152In conclusion: op has no fucking idea how to use blender OR unreal engine and keeps spouting nonsense - Dunning kruger at its finest.Blender already does a lot of clever stuff, while ue uses optimisations that would absolutely break blender in many ways. I'll not explain it here, learn both softwares and stop complaining
>>108197689are you sure that UE (even 5, with lumeme or whatever) can produce graphics good enough for a movie?
>>108209530sorry, wanted to reply here >>108197631
>>108196582Anon, you're bitching about tangerines not fitting through square pegs.
>>108196582Skill issue
Imagine coming to a public forum and admitting you're a retard.
>>108209570>>108209570I mean look at the engines that are WORSE than Unreal..>>108199016>>108196933
>>108211851No offense. But in my opinion the quailty of these are so good that I think its time to ask when its time that the future of animation engines start taking the tricks of game engines. I mean these games can run at 60 times a second.
>>108211851Fuck off, you have no Idea what you're talking about. These engines use shortcuts that just aren't good enough for raytracing. The reflections aren't actual reflections, they're live-calculated environment maps, maybe with some extra stuff, but absolutely not up to snuff for renderings. If you're so in love with game engines USE ONE! That's the fastest way for you to realize you're being an idiot. You just assume game engines are magical, but the amount of knowledge, tweaking, compromises and drawbacks they require to pull off such graphics are JUST NOT APPLICABLE in a rendering program.
Uh oh krishnu woke up
>Fuck off, you have no Idea what you're talking about. These engines use shortcuts that just aren't good enough for raytracing. The reflections aren't actual reflections, they're live-calculated environment maps, maybe with some extra stuff, but absolutely not up to snuff for renderings. If you're so in love with game engines USE ONE! That's the fastest way for you to realize you're being an idiot. You just assume game engines are magical, but the amount of knowledge, tweaking, compromises and drawbacks they require to pull off such graphics are JUST NOT APPLICABLE in a rendering program.Well I guess my question is. If its able to produce a reflection that looks indistingusihable from real ray traced reflections. Why don't we use that instead?
>>108212021Is it really that crazy of a question to ask?
>>108212026I mean imagine if we used the tricks of these engines to not create real time renders but rather allocate that saved time to make renders look even more photorealistic?
>>108212021DOWNLOAD UNREAL ENGINE RIGHT NOW AND TRY IT YOURSELF RETARD, AND STOP SPOUTING NONSENSEWhat you're seeing there is a feature called 'planar reflection'. It can only do that - reflect in a plane. You can't make a reflective teapot/sphere with it - for those, they use reflection probes. I don't have the time to explain an ignorant retard like you every single thing about why what you're saying is stupid, but believe me, it is stupid. If you actually want to know, instead of expecting people on 4CHAN OF ALL PLACES to explain every detail to you, LEARN IT YOURSELF. Imbecile
>>108212026this does not look realistic at all
>>108212047your seething rage and inability to handle questions make you seem dumb. Not smart.Also this is not true. The reflections you see in the GTA V enhanced edition require RT CORES to work. They don't use traditional rendering methods.>>108212051I don't have a 4090 to turn it up ALL the way and get 60 fps yet.
>>108212064alright what question do you want answered then, retard? Have you tried researching yourself? Have you tried using a game engine? UE is obviously what you want to use, why aren't you using it then? Is it too difficult to learn for the baby?
>>108212075Your negativity and insults does not disprove anything. If you have a point to make or a counterpoint id love to hear it. This is a open end discussion.
>>108212092my point is, a raytracing rendering engine like cycles makes compromises to achieve more realism, while game engines make compromises to achieve more performance. The compromises of one are impossible to accept in the other (can't have a game run at 1fps, can't have bad reflections/refractions in a raytraced renderer.Also my point is, YOU don't know enough, but YOU make claims that engines are SOOOO much better, without knowing their drawbacks. YOU should do the research, not me.That's what's pissing me off so much about you - you don't actually want to know, you just assume you're right.I hate people like that
>>108212123Id love to hear other sides. Which is why I came on here.Im saying that the compromises made by render engines like current CYCLES are becoming less justifyable by the quailty that game engines are providing. Those reflections were REAL ray traced ones not planar reflections. They require ACUTAL RT cores to work and update in real time 60 times a second. I KNOW there is a compromise between the two and thats the reason it runs at 1fps. I know that. And its why I MADE the argument in the first place because I believe as these engines get better the less and less the quailty gained from engines like cycles makes up for the time lost in rendering. That was my point imo. Which now at this point with the quailty of engines(After I played the GTA V enhanced edition with ray tracing on my graphics card I kept having that thought in my mind) that it would be a interesting discussion.
>>108212141To me, the performance of cycles is very much justified. The quality of cycles is A LOT better than Unreal, if you can't see that with your eyes, that's your problem. If you think game engines are so great, I don't understand why you don't use them. Your failure to understand why cycles takes as long as it takes stems PURELY from your lack of knowledge about both cycles and game engines. So why don't you just fucking try to use a game engine, instead of still being here?On a building site, you don't complain that the hammer is much better at driving nails into a wall than a screw driver, yet here you are, doing the exact same thing with software-tools. You don't understand what you're talking about
>>108212174You have to realize the guy arguing for engines is an indian with an amd gpu and he thinks vram is what makes renders better lmfao.Just ignore him
>>108199279That's what Eevee does?>>108199541Did you also set up your GoyPU in settings?
>>108212141That's what Eevee does?Except Eveee looks 10x worse than game engines.>>108212238Calling everyone indian just shows projection.
>>108212267Heres my settings. If you have any settings I need to turn and stuff let me know.
>>108212174The problem is that the WAY cycles does things is also kind of outdated and flawed.It draws the frame. Calculates the reflections and lightning data and HOW the light bounces across each surface. it then once done THROWS ALL THE INFORMATION AWAY AND STARTS OVER. and does that for every frame.
>>108212313just bake your lighting and then turn raytracing offall this bitching about recalculation just fucking bake it dumbass
>>108212337>just bake your lighting and then turn raytracing offthis>>108212328>The problem is that the WAY cycles does things is also kind of outdated and flawed.you have - as explained to you countless times - NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. It's NOT outdated. Do 3DS Max, Maya, Houdini, Blender, C4D ALL use outdated ways to do things, or do MAYBE YOU not understand what the fuck you're talking about? Is it big companies not understanding that other ways are better, or is it A SINGLE STUPID GUY on 4Chan not understanding... I wonder...
>>108212337Ok but that does not remove the core underlying issue with the WAY cycles renders things that im talking about.
>>108212363>It's NOT outdated. Do 3DS Max, Maya, Houdini, Blender, C4D ALL use outdated ways to do things, or do MAYBE YOU not understand what the fuck you're talking about? Is it big companies not understanding that other ways are better, or is it A SINGLE STUPID GUY on 4Chan not understanding... I wonder...The render times and second per quality says otherwise.
>>108212363Steve Jobs had a philopshy when switching from powerpc to intel that I kinda find relevant here."Performance per watt" Or the idea that quailty can be measured. I like to think that if we look at cycles to "Work done per second" or "Quailty produced per second" we see just how outdated the principals of max and blender are.Disney started using Unreal engine for the mandeloran, The Live action Lion king movie used unity from my knowledge. Its already at the point to where these engines can produce indistinguishable quality from cycles.
>>108212417And again at a fraction of the time spent rendering. And in some cases 60 times a second. >>108212363>It's NOT outdated. Do 3DS Max, Maya, Houdini, Blender, C4D ALL use outdated ways to do things, or do MAYBE YOU not understand what the fuck you're talking about? Is it big companies not understanding that other ways are better, or is it A SINGLE STUPID GUY on 4Chan not understanding... I wonder...Again 3DS max and blenders BIGGEST customers were companys with HUGE render farms or FUCK you money. And they had been DECADES behind the curve. It took until 2019 for GPU RENDERING TO BECOME STANDARD. Before that they used the CPU for everything despite the OBVIOUS downsides to it. Because the BIG renderfarms that they had were utilizing mainly CPU cores, so instead of adding BETTER GPU support they just continued supporting what there BIGGEST customers had. Nvidia pretty much had to submit patches to blender JUST to get them to FINALLY accept GPUS. They all suffer from complacency in my opinion.
>>108197631And again TIME spent rendering does not equal quailty. Those original fallout renders were more advanced than the rendering in HL2 that came almost 8 years later. But if you looked at how UGLY those animations were it was obvious WHICH looked better. It was not a artstyle difference it was because animation software refused to innovate compared to game engines which HAD to in order to keep a consistant framerate. As we approached the 2000s you could see budget animation studios despite having render settings that suprassed something like HL2 often looked WORSE than HL2 because of this reason. And they had entire RENDER farms. As we approached the 2010s it became MORE obvious.
>>108212475LOOK at the original Fortnite Trailer that was rendered on unreal engine and was done IN REAL time(They made a ENTIRE document about it during unreals golden age)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcQnHvvnehYThis ENTIRE animation was done in real time on just 2 GTX 1080 gpus on Unreal engine 4. I do not want to here about how "Oh ummm cycles isn't outdated at all" when were able to achieve THIS level of visuals in real time almost 8 years ago
>>108212393alright, retard, I challenge you to download whatever engine you like and render this simple scene I just whipped up in 3 minutes. Once you've done that, you'll have ALL the answers to your questions, I guarantee it.Until you've done that, SHUT THE FUCK UP and let this thread die
>>108212527>>108212497I want you to seriously look at this trailer that could be rendered in Real time and tell me that cycles is not outdated when we can have THIS level of quailty if Cycles adopted just 1/10 of the optimizations that game engines provide.
>>108212546shut the fuck up and make this scene in a game engine.
>>108212551Im rendering right now.
>>108212303No projection here. >>108212551You'll have to forgive him he renders on potatoes you can expect a result in 14 hours
>>108212581>over 30 seconds for only 225 sampleslmao
>>108212618K but to be fair this scene is a little bit more complex
>>108212611ITS NOT THAT BAD OK.
>>108212630Maybe not that much acutally. pretty conservative.
>>108212659At least i can still play zombies while rendering.
>>108212673>>108212527
>>108212778NIGGA I CANT. IM PLAYING THE GAME AT LIKE A STUTTERING 20ISH FPS ON THE MOST BASIC MAP.
>>108212797The download will take a while, that doesn't need your gpu. Start with that retard
>>108212801I have 10gbs of space I aint installing shit buster
>>108212806and you wonder why I keep calling you an ignorant imbecile, retard? Fuck you, you disgusting piece of trash
>>108212313No. In System settings, do you even have a cuda set up? Enabling GPU there won't so anything if you haven't configured it in preferences.
>>108213032
