"Rayraz, i don't appreciate you mocking or slandering my work"

I wans't slandering your work, I was just saying it's not exactly a render that's much of a challenge from a "technical render capabilities of your software" point of view. There's not many poly's not many objects for the light to interact, no tricky surfaces for light interaction, no reflective caustics. I'm not saying your work is bad, I'm just saying it's not an image that is representative as demonstration of the power of your render software.
I rendered a logo animation for a client just yesterday in bryce using reflections and soft shadows at 3 minutes per frame on average on premium settings. That's faster then your 5 minute photon rendered image, but to say bryce is the better renderer because of it would not be right, because the logo scene isn't representative for bryces full rendering capabilities.

Furthermore I find my communication is quite decent thank you, if even pumeco (who I've had fierce word exchanges with about PR in the past, so if anyone would have a reason to suspect my words might have to be interpreted as offensive it'd be him) gets the intentions of my statements right 1st time round. I think its you who needs to think a bit further before assuming I'm making bs statements or offending statements :)

"you contradicted yourself in the last two posts heavily"

Example?

quote1 "to understand the nature of debate is to understand that i am what I say, and am without equal in this arena."
reply1 "Definitely without equal."

aaah, spoken like a true master B-) I thought that statement was too arrogant to bother even responding to it but i like how u handle it PJF ;)

@"you are now leaving kansas"-post in general: Amen brother!

"sarcasm, insult, and unkind words leave me agreeing with the general consensus about Renderosity, but i won't blame you for everything, just for those things i just mentioned."

If you find the sarcasm insulting thats your problem. I merely shed light on the absurdness of claiming that theory on how to apply rendering techniques in a program are not to be released to the public in the form of a 'product'.
Books on rendering and lighting, sample scenefiles to demonstrate lighting and rendering settings, online documentation about rendering and lighting, material libraries, lighting rigs, they're all examples of products that do just this!
Pro-render has more then one of these above mentioned contents in it, therefor fits in the same line of products. If you denying these practices you're basically denying a very important branche of the industry and I don't think anyone will believe that the maya community laughs at this branche.
Perhaps you should think through what point I was making before feeling insulted ;)

---

Interesting side-plug

Where are we right now in the industry compared to photon rendering techniques like GI? I think the quote below will proove that the so called standards of GI have not yet fully broke through in the professional graphics segment. As much as TA rendertimes are often not acceptable for "professional animation use" GI is still often not used either, not even by the people who have HUGE renderfarms with more combined renderpower then all the members on this forum added together (with such render power the impact of frames that render for a day on our home desktop pc is ofcourse much smaller)
Now I realize that bryce ain't anywhere near ever catching up with the professional programs, but I think it's safe to say we're all still at the beginning of these techniques. Both bryce amatures and feature film professionals.

---

"Since every movie I have worked on has been a renderman show, GI was not really an option.

I really don't think GI is to heavy for features if used in the right way for the right sort of project. It is something that will creep into it from the ground up. You will start to see it on things like digital sets. Rendering engines such as Vray first started to dominate the archviz world (which BTW may be the largest community in the CG world) and now you can really start to see it more and more in broadcasts such as commercials.

Renderman has the ability to be completely customized and be built for a massive complex pipeline. That is what makes it so powerful for films. It is not just a renderman rendering engine, it becomes a Stealth rendering engine, an I, Robot rendering engine. Once rendering engines like Vray have that ability (and they will), it will be a lot more common on features in big studios. It is either that tools such as Vray have to become more like renderman, or renderman has to start "modernizing".

Either way, I don't think anyone can deny that GI WILL be in the near future of all feature film VFX."

Christopher Nichols
Senior Technical Director
Sony Pictures Imageworks Message edited on: 02/17/2006 04:46

(_/)
(='.'=)
(")(")This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.