|
Anyone know of a good place to look for 3d-related freelance jobs? I wanna make a few extra dollars and would love to find a few simple projects to work on. However, I'm not really sure where a good place to look would be. Any suggestions?
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2009 03:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 23:16 |
|
|
sigma 6 posted:EoinCannon: Amazing sculpt as usual. The veins on the legs seem a bit too big. Also the bandages on the sword scabbard and boots don't look right. Ryan Kingslien made a nice tutorial about making Thor's bandaged boots. Thanks mate Dead right about the leg veins. I've actually completely remade all the costume and weapon elements in MAX with proper strapping, topology and mapping etc so I can texture and do some nice renders in the vein of the last character I did. I'll post a render soon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2009 06:59
|
|
|
One really drat annoying thing about CUDA is it's in C, gently caress that, give me C++ or nothing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2009 07:49
|
|
|
sigma 6 posted:advice on game engines? I'm gonna second the Unity stuff. It's what we've got at my school, we use it alongside Maya (like you, we're working from the Game Art perspective rather than the Game Software side). The workflow is fantastic; as DefMech said, you literally save the file straight out of Max or Maya in its native format, and Unity will do all the work of importing (it sort of locks up while doing so but doesn't take very long). It takes all manner of texture file formats, and can do a bunch of stuff that's pretty reasonably advanced without too much hassle. One of my favorite things is that it can make use of up to two UV sets for one object, so you can, say, map a box with all six sides on the same UV space, then have a second UV set where they're all separate so you can use that map for a baked light map or occlusion map (or even just another overlayed texture). Again, no real hassle, just set the object's material to lightmapped-diffuse-bump, and load up the textures. The project I'm working on right now depends very much on this ability, so I was pretty excited when I finally figured out how to get all that working. (not terribly advanced I know, but I can't think of any other game engine/mod tool that lets you do this as easily as Unity does) Aside from that (another workflow-booster), similar to the CryEngine editor, you can press Ctrl-P (Command-P on Mac) to go in-game at any time while you're working. It comes with a prefab for a simple, configurable first person view controller which is great for seeing how everything looks in game. Speaking of Mac, did I mention Unity can output games for Windows, Mac, your web browser, and even iPhone? (output for iPhone requires a separate license though) The editor is also cross-platform; it was originally Mac-only and has recently been brought to Windows. Both share completely identical functionality and the project files are totally cross-compatible. I don't know of very many game developers in general who can boast this, let alone game development tool developers. As a side note, that game Fusion Fall that Cartoon Network released a little while back, was made in Unity. Haven't played it myself but, among other things, that means this engine also does internet multiplayer (with code that works well enough for an MMO). Some of the cooler effects (real-time reflections, nice-looking water, making in-game lights cast real-time shadows) all require the Pro version, but compared to all the other game engines even that costs next to nothing. The Indie version is $200 and the Pro is $1500. By comparison, the Unreal Engine costs a few hundred thousand dollars for a full license. The only engines with a better price tag than Unity are the free ones. I don't have any experience with those unfortunately, so I can't speak for or against 'em. ApproachingInfinity fucked around with this message at 09:14 on Aug 12, 2009 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2009 09:12
|
|
|
EoinCannon posted:Thanks mate Could you show some before and after shots of topology and stuff if you have them? I'd like to see the workflow moving from Z-brush to Max. I know there has been some discussion in this thread about that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2009 13:09
|
|
|
sigma 6 posted:^^^ That's pretty crazy. Didn't know squids could change color. What is your goal for your game engine? Teaching art students how to use it to preview assets? Making full games? Collaborating with a programming department to make actual games? I don't see why you wouldn't use UE3 for everything - it has a strong rendering pipeline, a bunch of shader tools, and is used by a million studios. You don't need the full engine license, there are plenty of mods making mods with new character models, scripting, etc.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2009 15:02
|
|
|
 Can I start animating now? Please? Pretty please!
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 03:43
|
|
|
I dont know, the arms and limbs just arent doing it for me. The flatness and waviness of the edge makes them look very insubstantial.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 03:46
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:What is your goal for your game engine? Teaching art students how to use it to preview assets? Making full games? Collaborating with a programming department to make actual games? We are meant to have a game prototype as a goal for the curriculum. The problem is that it is left up to each campus to use an engine of their choice. Most campuses use UE3 but we have run into problems with support from them. Also, the guy who knows most (very little) isn't willing to go to any forums for help etc. I would rather use the cryengine or unity vs the level editor which comes with UE3. Add to this the fact that we have a game software curriculum too. These guys are meant to team up with the game art guys but it isn't clear exactly where or how. Regardless, an engine needs to be picked and standardized. Ideally the engine should be VERY EASY for the game art dept. to use, yet flexible enough for the software guys to make changes and add where needed. The goal isn't necessarily to make an entire game (though that would be nice), but rather prototype a few working levels with assets built in Maya and Max. ApproachingInfinity and Defmech: THANKS! I am trying to push for Unity, but I am only one voice in this and there is another teacher who prefers Cryengine 2.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 04:02
|
|
|
Hey Hinchu, when did you start working on this? Just curious, I'm glad to see it still coming along. This stuff is a lot of work and it's looking good. I'm still working on my short film Jackalope Road (Previously Shoot The Moon) It will be 4 years this November.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 04:04
|
|
|
SynthOrange posted:I dont know, the arms and limbs just arent doing it for me. The flatness and waviness of the edge makes them look very insubstantial.  Does this look any better? My wife mentioned a very similar issue with it. http://www.alephbet.com/pictures/21396.jpg This is sort of the idea I was copying on the arms. Oh and also here are some images of the set I need to finish up work on. I also need to figure out how I'm going to light it. I would love to have a lighting kit to play around with. I may just build myself some cheap rigged up lights with gels that I can play around with.    Where TikTok lurks. It will definitely have a much different feel once I get the backdrop in and it will be lit with a lot cooler lights, as opposed to the warm ones from my lamp. I will also take photos with a ridiculously small aperture to maximize the depth of field, to get sharp images. These are just quick hand-held shots. Oh and also Ray Harryhausen's Sinbad is in the background for cheesy but great animation inspiration  SGT. Squeaks posted:Hey Hinchu, when did you start working on this? Just curious, I'm glad to see it still coming along. This stuff is a lot of work and it's looking good. I'm at three years now as I started it right after "The Tin Woodsman". Of course I've worked on other projects since then, and this one has fallen by the wayside. Plus in that time I met my wife, got married, bought a house, got a full time design job, etc etc etc. Also I've bumped this project up to high priority because I just found out that a Wizard of Oz CG movie is in the works so I want to get my first scene done before it comes out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 04:17
|
|
|
Hinchu posted:Does this look any better? My wife mentioned a very similar issue with it. http://www.alephbet.com/pictures/21396.jpg This is sort of the idea I was copying on the arms. In the illustration the arms end in bell shaped segments, giving the limbs a decent sense of weight and structure. Having the same waviness going through the whole limb makes it look very frail.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 04:30
|
|
|
God I love miniature set background plates. That looks great. I loved Harryhausen's work as a kid.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 04:32
|
|
|
Hinchu posted:I'm at three years now as I started it right after "The Tin Woodsman". Of course I've worked on other projects since then, and this one has fallen by the wayside. Plus in that time I met my wife, got married, bought a house, got a full time design job, etc etc etc. Also I've bumped this project up to high priority because I just found out that a Wizard of Oz CG movie is in the works so I want to get my first scene done before it comes out. Dude that background is awesome! I was just curious. Pretty much the same reasons I've been working on mine for so long. Got married, got a house, had a kid a month ago, stopped working at Disney Interactive, etc. I've given up on it a dozen times, and gone back a dozen more. Every time I ditch it I think of a good reason to work on it some more.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 04:46
|
|
|
SynthOrange posted:In the illustration the arms end in bell shaped segments, giving the limbs a decent sense of weight and structure. Having the same waviness going through the whole limb makes it look very frail. I think it's the difference between seeing them head-on and from the side. In a 2D illustration you can get away with it but 3D is a little more difficult like that. For example, my favourite trick to make robots look more organic is to have hydraulic tubes snaking around their limbs, emulating the outlines of smooth, round muscles. That works really well in 2D, but it's a bitch in 3D because of the changing angles. Same thing here with the flat limbs, I think. Maybe it would help to give them an X-shaped cross-section between the joints, like two sheets intersecting at right angles?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 09:36
|
|
|
I still think that head looks pretty creepy dude. A tinman shouldn't be as humanized as you've got it :[
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 09:50
|
|
|
sigma 6 posted:God I love miniature set background plates. That looks great. I loved Harryhausen's work as a kid. I grew up on Jason and the Argonauts. Those skeletons were great. I'd love to capture some of the sense of adventure and fun in my own animation. I feel like I'm trying to make my animation work for the same demographic as that which would watch those movies. This was my first time to watch Sinbad, I'd only caught the last bit on TV a few times as a kid. wayfinder posted:I think it's the difference between seeing them head-on and from the side. In a 2D illustration you can get away with it but 3D is a little more difficult like that. I think this is the issue. I'm quite attached to the idea is the only problem... I might play with it some more. Translating from 2d to 3d makes a lot of thing change, especially around joints and where things move. I might just make a conscious effort to keep the limbs oriented correctly as much as possible. ceebee posted:I still think that head looks pretty creepy dude. A tinman shouldn't be as humanized as you've got it :[ Hrmm... I think I'm going to keep him as is. I've tried de-creepifying the model as much as possible, but I think the concept as I have it is just a bit creepy. SGT. Squeaks posted:Dude that background is awesome! Thanks I can't wait to start animating on top of it. I have the backside to work on a lot still and a a few more trees to finish building. I have to re-build a well on the backside, because my current one sucks.Yeah, life gets in the way, but that's a good thing. I'm still holding out on kids for a few years though! That is if I can keep my wife from going to baby showers and friends who have cute kids.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 13:40
|
|
|
Hey guys, I've just finished a sort of beta portfolio. I'm aware that it's kind of weak, but I simply can't spend much more time on it right now. I need to start sending it places in hopes of getting an entry-level job, the sooner the better. http://www.fileupyours.com/view/253674/folio_cut.pdf (I've cut out the first page with my real name and contact info.) I've been working on this for a few months, I started learning 3ds Max on my own. It seems to be pretty hard to get that first foot in the door, I really hope this will be good enough. I'd be grateful for any comments you can spare.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 14:05
|
|
|
Rasselas posted:Hey guys, I've just finished a sort of beta portfolio. I'm aware that it's kind of weak, but I simply can't spend much more time on it right now. I need to start sending it places in hopes of getting an entry-level job, the sooner the better. I'd definitely advise learning how to use VRay. (I woulda suggested Mental Ray but I've never figured out to use it myself, heh.) Your setups are obviously very simple but they could benefit from some more interesting materials. Bump maps, displacement maps, dirt maps and ambient occlusion passes would help. I've been using Max for about 8 years myself and it's only really in the past two years that my showreel has finally started to look good. The the thing that made the difference was attempting to use the software to create something truly artistic. Try something dark and gloomy for example -- something which draws the viewer inwards and creates a kind of intriguing look at a world they haven't seen before. Hope this isn't too vague! Oh and as much of a cliche as it is to say this, target your work towards a specific niche.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 17:04
|
|
|
sigma 6 posted:We are meant to have a game prototype as a goal for the curriculum. The problem is that it is left up to each campus to use an engine of their choice. Most campuses use UE3 but we have run into problems with support from them. Also, the guy who knows most (very little) isn't willing to go to any forums for help etc. Do the game software dudes actually write any of their own engines? Back at RIT, my alma mater, they had a 2d programming course followed by a 3d programming course, and the gist of it was that both courses would teach the students how to make a 2d engine and 3d engine - they used certain libraries (DirectX .x model format, for example) that had some existing support tools that made it easier to have artists interface with the software than having the students write tools, but the programming students were still getting some harder level stuff than just game logic. The 2d engine would get recycled into the 3d engine and then after that students usually had a pretty good base to build something for a self-study project (I'm forgetting the term we had where basically you could earn credits for self study, but the 2d/3d professor would basically sponsor you for that, and some folks even got co-op/internship pay for it). The engines they were building at the time didn't require advanced shader support that would be beneficial to an art student, but getting that added to the curriculum wouldn't be that hard, especially if you guys are on a semester schedule (RIT did 10 week quarters). Have you considered Source at all? If you're looking for support Source and UE3 are probably the most heavily documented and supported. I'd like to be of more help but to be honest I don't know poo poo about Unity or Cryengine. I'd stay far away from Ogre, though, and you've had negative experiences with Torque. As for your knowledgeable guy not going to forums to get assistance - is he a professor? If so, he should be fired. Is he a student? He should be failed. Seriously, if he isn't engaging the internet for assistance he's not going to find much help. The reality is that in an actual work environment, outside of the documentation that comes with UE3/Source/etc, he'll have to ask people how to use poo poo, and sometimes will be writing the documentation on stuff himself. In-studio tools are not user friendly and easy to learn, typically. edit: Rass, gently caress pdfs. I'm not reading it and a lot of hiring folks aren't going to be interested either. The rest of the world uses HTML, and they have a web connection.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 17:25
|
|
|
Thanks for the reply, schmuckfeatures. So V-Ray is the secret to nifty renders. I've started learning it but it takes some time. I tried mental ray as well, but got lost. The Stourhead Cottage was supposed to be the main work. I've started mapping it but it looked pretty horrible, so I opted to place something that looks good rather than a half-assed attempt at more complicated stuff. I'm a bit bewildered as far as targeting a niche goes. I'd much rather do stuff like the piggies, but it seems one has to be really good for that. A more likely option is arch viz, but I don't really have the works in my portfolio to support it. So, yeah, that comment is really spot on. I think I'd love it if someone would hire me just to churn out models, and someone else to handle the rendering. Sigma-X, thanks for the advice. I'm currently submitting in a small local area, and 3d freelancers here still send out pdf's. I'll make a website and a showreel when I get better at this, but I don't think my work is good enough yet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 18:16
|
|
|
I'm going into my final semester at school and need to start thinking about how to add to and strengthen my showreel. My main interest is in the technical lighting/rendering side of things. I latched onto Mental Ray within a week of learning how to set up lights and that was the beginning of the end.  I threw this together in a hurry after I got a surprise request for a sample of my work a few months ago. My main problem with it right off the bat is that it's very short. I've been working in Maya for about 1 1/2 years now and have only recently started producing anything that looks even kind of decent. So...here goes. http://www.vimeo.com/4932322 Thoughts, comments, suggestions...you name it, I need it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 19:05
|
|
|
Rasselas posted:Thanks for the reply, schmuckfeatures. So V-Ray is the secret to nifty renders. I've started learning it but it takes some time. I tried mental ray as well, but got lost. The Stourhead Cottage was supposed to be the main work. I've started mapping it but it looked pretty horrible, so I opted to place something that looks good rather than a half-assed attempt at more complicated stuff. If you want to do organic things like characters you pretty much need to learn zbrush or mudbox. If you want to do hard surface/enviorments/arch viz max is fine by itself generally. If you want to make a proffesional image in arch viz you need several things: 1) An accurate 3D model, which is probaly the easiest if you take your time. 2) A realistic diffuse texture for every different surface tiled properly if required, if you can't paint realisticily use photos. You can use photos even if you can paint realisticly afterall theres not much reason not too. 3) An accurate normal/bump map that reflects the grooves/bumps/ridges/scratched away areas etc for every different surface. Without it your model is very "blocky" as the light only varies based on what vertexs you have explictily modelled. 4) Correct reflection/specularity settings for each object (And part of each object). If you render a scene without adjusting these settings you are telling the computer everything is equally reflective. In practice things like water or wet things are more reflective, smooth plastics are more reflective, lumpy rough surfaces are less reflective. If you don't set the settings correctly smooth things dont quite look smooth and rough things don't quite look rough. 5) Correct light settings and light placement. Ideally you want light that bounces multiple times, that carries the light color of things it hits to its next bounce etc. You need an understanding of light and an understanding of vray / mental ray / whatever production class renderer you are using. This is a nice tutorial on general lighting if you haven't read it yet: http://www.itchy-animation.co.uk/light.htm
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 19:17
|
|
|
Hinchu posted:I think this is the issue. I'm quite attached to the idea is the only problem... I might play with it some more. Translating from 2d to 3d makes a lot of thing change, especially around joints and where things move. I might just make a conscious effort to keep the limbs oriented correctly as much as possible.   That would give you a more solid shape.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 19:29
|
|
|
I think if you just shorten the arms and legs it helps a lot.  ps. Photoshop CS4's content aware scaling loving rocks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 19:42
|
|
|
Long time no forum! (for me anyway) Was at SIGGRAPH which was alright, nothing too amazing like everyone had told me- apparently it was the smallest and quietest in years. Now I am about to move to London for VFX work it would seem, moving countries so frequently is a pain in the rear end. But anyway, have some houdini shader goodness:  Click here for the full 1280x720 image. Micropoly displacement gets me off.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 21:46
|
|
Heintje posted:Long time no forum! (for me anyway) Was at SIGGRAPH which was alright, nothing too amazing like everyone had told me- apparently it was the smallest and quietest in years. Now I am about to move to London for VFX work it would seem, moving countries so frequently is a pain in the rear end. drat that blending looks good. Only thing that is prominent is the tiling. In case you ZBrushers haven't seen this yet: http://www.zbrushcentral.com/zbc/showthread.php?t=73956&page=1&pp=15 I'm stoked for ZB 3.5 and 4.0
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 23:25
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:Do the game software dudes actually write any of their own engines? Back at RIT, my alma mater, they had a 2d programming course followed by a 3d programming course, and the gist of it was that both courses would teach the students how to make a 2d engine and 3d engine - they used certain libraries (DirectX .x model format, for example) that had some existing support tools that made it easier to have artists interface with the software than having the students write tools, but the programming students were still getting some harder level stuff than just game logic. Our school at least doesn't do that, but mostly because we don't really do anything with computer science people. It's just the 3d students having to make the game (or game prototype, pretty much exactly what sigma 6 described) on our own. Unity fit us perfectly, since little-to-no understanding of programming is needed if all you want is a game level you can walk around in and look at. For us the point is mainly to show off that you understand how to create and set up the assets, like models, textures, etc, for the purposes of a game engine. Enough prefabbed stuff is built in that you don't need to do hardly anything other than import your models (collisions can be auto-generated), drop the prefab first person controller in, and hit play. I would have suggested Source as well, but if I'm correct a full license is pretty much just as expensive as Unreal Engine. There's the mod tools, but with those, the important part (getting assets into it that are my own and not stuff the base game comes with) is prohibitively difficult. In other words doable, but a huge pain in the rear end. The documentation on Source is actually really poor for this. Despite there being a lot of it around, it's just not enough; once you get past basics it's often incomplete or just absent completely. Some of the tools that Valve includes with the mod SDK currently have no documentation anywhere, so everyone has to make their own tools that half the time don't work correctly, or can't do everything. This is probably different if you have a full license, but again, the cost. Sigma-X posted:As for your knowledgeable guy not going to forums to get assistance - is he a professor? If so, he should be fired. Is he a student? He should be failed. Agreed. Chances are, with this kind of stuff, no amount of books or documentation can match the amount of support you'll get simply by asking people on forums or looking up guides on the web. The internet is your knowledgebase, especially with Source or Unreal Engine, where the forums are where you can get answers straight from Epic or Valve developers themselves. Rasselas posted:I'm currently submitting in a small local area, and 3d freelancers here still send out pdf's. I'll make a website and a showreel when I get better at this, but I don't think my work is good enough yet. Sounds like using a website + showreel instead of PDFs would be an easy way for you to be one step ahead of all the others then Heintje posted:Long time no forum! (for me anyway) Was at SIGGRAPH which was alright, nothing too amazing like everyone had told me- apparently it was the smallest and quietest in years. Now I am about to move to London for VFX work it would seem, moving countries so frequently is a pain in the rear end. The rocks look awesome, but that grass, at least when it's up close it just looks like some kind of green, plasma... stuff. What exactly is micropoly displacement? I haven't used Houdini before, but that sounds very similar to what 3dsmax does with its Displacement modifier (albeit more advanced I imagine?).
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2009 23:59
|
|
|
Hinchu posted:Could you show some before and after shots of topology and stuff if you have them? I'd like to see the workflow moving from Z-brush to Max. I know there has been some discussion in this thread about that. I would also like to see your workflow here. Heintje: I am jealous you get to travel so much!! The displacement looks great but the lighter areas of the ground has obvious tiling. ceebee: Zbrush 4 looks like it will be as revolutionary as Zbrush 3 was.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2009 00:28
|
|
|
Yeah I'm also curious as to how to seamlessly go from ZBrush -> Max -> ZBrush. I've been starting my basemeshes using extract in ZBrush or using the retopology tools to build a clean base. But importing meshes from ZBrush to Max seems to flip them...and it also seems to gently caress up the scale back and forth. So when I import them back into ZBrush to continue sculpting they're all over the goddamn place and like 300% scaled >:[
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2009 01:28
|
|
|
hmmmm I haven't experienced any scale issues from MAX to ZBrush yet. In the ZBrush tool palette you can down to "export" and change the scale factor when exporting meshes. I haven't been able to touch the Cohen model in a week or so but I'll try and make some sort of document or video showing retop stuff or just generally how I go between ZBrush and MAX. -Dreggory The first shot is really good, definitely should be the first shot :/ Good realism I think maybe the shadows are a little dark on the foreground grasshoppers, you could probably put in more fill light or even just shift the levels. The pumpkin shader looks a bit standard. Seems like they are crying out for some translucency or sss or something. EoinCannon fucked around with this message at 02:52 on Aug 14, 2009 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2009 02:48
|
|
|
ApproachingInfinity posted:The rocks look awesome, but that grass, at least when it's up close it just looks like some kind of green, plasma... stuff. What exactly is micropoly displacement? I haven't used Houdini before, but that sounds very similar to what 3dsmax does with its Displacement modifier (albeit more advanced I imagine?). Ya there's tiling issues and general mush when you see the surface without any trees or bushes. It looks a lot better when you have those and look from a low angle (working on all that now). Micropoly displacement is a REYES renderer feature (ala renderman and mantra), for each pixel the camera sees what polys are there, then divides them into micro polys for the purposes of displacing them, and then applying shaders + rendering them. It's REALLY fast and easy to control, and just plain fun when you get into the groove of it. So to summarize, at render the renderer will divide up a little bit of geo into mini bits, and then displace them for rendering goodness.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2009 18:18
|
|
|
   It's coming along. Sorry about the global illumination spots, I'm sure they'll get fixed somewhere along the line.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2009 21:12
|
|
|
Handiklap posted:Gentlemen, we have Expenditure Approval™ Have you put this together yet? I have grant money that I can put towards a computer, so this is the first time I've ever been able to consider a dual Xeon machine but I haven't been able to find benchmarks that compares a set up like this to the current i7 processors. I'd welcome even anecdotal information at this point. In fact I don't even know if there are OS limitations with server motherboards.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2009 21:56
|
|
|
Listerine posted:Have you put this together yet? I have grant money that I can put towards a computer, so this is the first time I've ever been able to consider a dual Xeon machine but I haven't been able to find benchmarks that compares a set up like this to the current i7 processors. I'd welcome even anecdotal information at this point. I am also getting ready to build an i7 OR a xeon and haven't quite decided which way to go yet. I know I can get a i7 920 for 200$ at microcenter and that seems to be the best deal going. Not sure if it is worth the extra few hundred for a xeon machine but this is my primary internal debate as well. spottedfeces: Really nice progress. Heintje: I was going to mention that renderman does micropoly displacement as well but a lot of houdini artists are preferring mantra to renderman these days I hear. Depending on whether or not you already have experience using Renderman of course. Thanks again for all the help on the render engines guys. The game software guys seems pretty happy with Unity so far so hopefully we can get it for at least this one campus. I am tempted to try it out at home too. The guy who refuses to get on forums should have been let go a long time ago but that is another story entirely. sigma 6 fucked around with this message at 03:17 on Aug 17, 2009 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2009 05:43
|
|
|
Listerine posted:Have you put this together yet? I have grant money that I can put towards a computer, so this is the first time I've ever been able to consider a dual Xeon machine but I haven't been able to find benchmarks that compares a set up like this to the current i7 processors. I'd welcome even anecdotal information at this point. I went on vacation the week I ordered all the parts for this machine, so it was only up and running an OS (xp64) on Friday. Would have been sooner, but there was some incompatibility between my motherboard and power supply. The board actually wanted two 8-pin eps12v connections, so I just said gently caress it and soldered up an adapter to use two rails of 4-pin molex. Worked great, and even the lovely cpu fans did their job. I'll let you know how it works out on Monday after I do some comparitive tests, although I'm not sure how much good they'll do you, as I'll be comparing it to an older gen 1.6ghz dual xeon system. I can say that the ssd worked out awesome. From first [pre-install] boot to desktop in under 20 minutes. I haven't been able to clock a cold boot yet, but I'm sure the numbers will be similarly impressive.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2009 13:38
|
|
|
I wouldn't recommend getting the new xeons, you'd be wasting hundreds of dollars on the second proc, special mobo and not to mention the ram for it is extremely expensive, I highly doubt you're going to be needing more than an i7 920.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2009 02:06
|
|
|
Ratmann posted:I wouldn't recommend getting the new xeons, you'd be wasting hundreds of dollars on the second proc, special mobo and not to mention the ram for it is extremely expensive, I highly doubt you're going to be needing more than an i7 920. I agree. Xeons for blade racks for render farms, nothing else, especially for a home system. The only way I'd blow a ton of money on a xeon setup for rendering is for a quick-cash turnaround job if it paid really well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2009 04:13
|
|
|
BigKOfJustice posted:I agree. Exactly, and even IF you need the heavy render power for freelance, there are a ton of very reliable online rendering companies that cost a very competitive fee for render power.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2009 04:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 23:16 |
|
|
Ratmann posted:Exactly, and even IF you need the heavy render power for freelance, there are a ton of very reliable online rendering companies that cost a very competitive fee for render power. On that note, can anybody recommend one for me? I'm doing a big project at the moment at HD res, and my two workstations just aren't giving me very great render times. Here's a few I found through Google: http://www.ultrarenderfarm.com/ http://www.rebusfarm.com/ http://www.ranchcomputing.com/ Anybody worked with these guys before? I'm using Max & VRay.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2009 08:27
|
|