Yafray? - My small conclusion.

Blender's renderer and external renderer export

Moderators: jesterKing, stiv

ideasman
Posts: 1000
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2003 2:37 pm

Yafray? - My small conclusion.

Postby ideasman » Thu Feb 05, 2004 4:38 am

I had a muck around with yafray/blender intergration as Im sure many of you have.

Strangely enough, after the initial WOW of yafrays GI and nice lighting, I was not as amazed as I expected Id be.

* With yafray you cant render without perspective (Orthographic) - Somthing I needed it to do.

* It takes ages! :D (I know I'll get flamed for saying that but it does)
I sould mention that I was using GI a lot, The few renders I did without GI seemed fast enough.

* Yafrays GI always generates grainyness, looks great and photo-realistic too, but if you dont want grain theres no non grainty GI options (Other then a lighting array?).

* Clipping doesent work, Probably becasue raytracers dont woth the same as scanline renderers?? I just needed to use distance clipping on the camera once and found it didnt work.

* All faces are double sided (AFAIK) I did some tests and I couldent get a single sided face.

... Thats it

An comparison blenders renderer is now quite good with raytraced shadows, radiosity, alpha affecting shadows, refraction and passthrough (fake caustics)
- Im not sure but blenders freature list (when it comes to rendering) compares well with Lightwave, Max and Maya?

I think the scanline renders definetly worth persisting with, that or make yafray capable in the same ways blender's render is (not sure if thats posibel, yafray being a raytracer)

- 2c, would like to here some others experiences with yafray or general commants.

alltaken
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 7:08 am

Postby alltaken » Thu Feb 05, 2004 7:13 am

yeah my yafray experience is fantastic :D

the GI options are good and the results are nice.


the render time is the only bummer as background rendering isn't done yet :( but thats not a major issue or anything.

everything else works perfectly




blenders raytracer works very well also, with a GI option the blender one would rock so much.


Alltaken

eeshlo
Posts: 132
Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2002 10:02 pm

Postby eeshlo » Thu Feb 05, 2004 7:19 am

I actually expected this some time or another, sooner actually, but maybe some people are afraid to say it... Although from what I read I think harkyman never quite seemed to like the yafray 'worship'.

Part of the reason is of course that people have to learn to use it, and the current 'half-baked' implementation doesn't make that easier. I can imagine people getting frustrated getting lighting levels similar, or wondering how to do refraction (when Blender renders it and yafray seemingly doesn't), or trying to understand the GI options, it must be quite confusing.

From what I have seen sofar, most yafray rendered pictures sofar tend to look a bit similar. People try to go for the 'photo-realistic' look, but some come out looking a bit .. well... flat, not really very interesting lighting levels.
The photo realism concept probably is quite stifling to creativity. I guess people have to try to think out of the box for this, and this might take some time to happen. At the moment it is used more as a toy (lots of test renders) than a serious tool, some of the long time yafray users maybe could try do do some yafray tutorials similar to the ones available for Blender.

About the other things: orthographic camera and clipping can be implemented if really needed, but doesn't really have much priority at the moment.
About the grain, you have used full GI with cache and gradients?
Rendering speed: funny how many complain about this, considering how many of the more experienced yafray users (who have used yafray before the Blender integration) tend to say it is one of the fastest around. Global Illumination is quite some task, of course there are renderers which can do it even faster, mostly commercial ones though.

And to conclude, YafRay is not meant to replace the Blender renderer, which even can do things yafray currently cannot. For some, half the fun of using Blender is actually trying to figure out ways to do things you can do with an external renderer but many times faster.
And that probably adds to the creativity and the effort people put into it, Blender can produce results which can compare with the best of them, as a lot of Blender artists show time and time again.

solmax
Posts: 309
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 2:47 am
Contact:

Re: Yafray? - My small conclusion.

Postby solmax » Thu Feb 05, 2004 7:26 pm

ideasman wrote:- Im not sure but blenders freature list (when it comes to rendering) compares well with Lightwave, Max and Maya?


well, almost. radiosity results still depend on mesh resolution, and blender doesn't have a volumetric rendering engine (for smoke or flames), like lw's hypervoxels. but anyway integrating raytracing is a huge step in the right direction. i'm happy being able to produce now trivial things like reflections without weird env-map setups.

t_bone_blendin
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 3:24 am

Yafray Crashed - Is it in path?

Postby t_bone_blendin » Fri Feb 06, 2004 3:55 am

I downloaded and installed the latest blender (2.32) and yafray (0.0.6). I'm running Mac OS X Panther. When I use a simple scene, or one of the two Yafray blender scenes (cornell box for example), I get the following error in a console window:

Yafray found at : /usr/local/bin/
Starting YafRay ...
Loading grammar ...
Starting parser ...
Yafray crashed
Could not execute yafray. Is it in path?


The paths I found yafray installed in were:
/usr/local/bin/yafray
/usr/local/lib/....
/private/etc/gram.yafray

This didn't agree with the documentation on the yafray site, but i think it was old documentation. Is there a way to tell blender the correct path? Is there something else wrong?

Thanks!

GFA-MAD
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 7:59 pm

Postby GFA-MAD » Tue Feb 10, 2004 7:49 pm

Yafray is a good thing in Blender. But I've notice another problem: Front & Back face of an extruded curve are invisible when rendering with Yafray. :(

jsplifer
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 4:37 pm
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA USA
Contact:

Postby jsplifer » Wed Feb 11, 2004 1:04 am

t_bone_blendin,

Blender 2.32 and Yafray 0.0.6 installed under Panther works on this mac. Not really sure whats going on but maybe try downloading and installing again or perhaps doing a very very simple scene to see if it works.

jsplifer

Darqus
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 11:44 pm

Postby Darqus » Fri Feb 13, 2004 12:02 am

not so much a request as a question... yafray has some killer results and therfore logically uses amazing amounts of computation. would it be possible (theoretically speaking) to make some sort of rendering card for it? the renderdrive card http://www.art-render.com seems like a great idea.
it is said to accelerate raytracing by up to 400% :D.

my :idea: idea :idea: would be to make some sort of open source rendercard - open enough to write code for almost any raytracer. development costs would be kept low by having the enourmous codemonkey resource of the oss society working on it, and manufacturing costs could probably be funded by the oncheering crowd. we've seen it done before, with blender being bailed out and the new manual funding. the revenue for the cards would give the blender foundation all the funding it needs, while having the increased performance of the yafray-blender combo make it a serious contender to practically anything out there!

cheers!

macouno
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 3:37 am

Postby macouno » Fri Feb 13, 2004 2:16 am

I did my two days of messing around with yafray to get it to work... then played with it... maybe twice. I just don't have the time to wait for those renders... sorry but not worth it to me, not till it gets down to a practical speed. I mean I'm complaining about blender when it takes 30 mins to render a frame.

I think the thing is that for single image rendering it may be worth it but for video production.... I can't wait 100 days for 200 frames of video. The 100 hours it may ammount to with the scanline renderer frightens me enough.

ideasman
Posts: 1000
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2003 2:37 pm

Postby ideasman » Fri Feb 13, 2004 5:40 am

Darqus wrote:not so much a request as a question... yafray has some killer results and therfore logically uses amazing amounts of computation. would it be possible (theoretically speaking) to make some sort of rendering card for it? the renderdrive card http://www.art-render.com seems like a great idea.
it is said to accelerate raytracing by up to 400% :D.

my :idea: idea :idea: would be to make some sort of open source rendercard - open enough to write code for almost any raytracer. development costs would be kept low by having the enourmous codemonkey resource of the oss society working on it, and manufacturing costs could probably be funded by the oncheering crowd. we've seen it done before, with blender being bailed out and the new manual funding. the revenue for the cards would give the blender foundation all the funding it needs, while having the increased performance of the yafray-blender combo make it a serious contender to practically anything out there!

cheers!


I know this sould be on a yafray forum :)

I used to think this would be a good idea- Extra hardware for rendering, take the load off the CPU.. whatever.

Now I dont know a lot about this but sombody can tell me if Im wrong.

For any significant advantage the card would...
A) The processor on the card would have to be close to or faster then the CPU (process an equivilent amount of data)

B) Have enough raytracing algorithums/shaders/etc hard wired into it that it was inhently better at computing a raytraced render then your PC. (well designed)

SO your options are: Make a Processor as good as Intel, IBM, AMD.. or Invent an amazingly fast way to impliment raytracing through hardware.

Both are very much not going to happen soon.

Why not simply go SMP? or a 4 way system? There are many networks around, why not render over one?
I think hardware would also limit the yafray userbase because it might be limited to ai32 (x86) CPU's and mac users couldent use it.

There is hardware out there that is pretty much A CPU on a PCI card. The one I saw specialized in floating point math and seemed very good- You could interface yafray with that if you could be bothered. - Use that as a render card.

Oh well sorry to spoil your dream...

- Cam

Darqus
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 11:44 pm

Postby Darqus » Fri Feb 13, 2004 10:50 am

it will be :wink:

if you had read my entire post and clickety clicked the little link to get you to http://www.art-render.com and read about the PURE card then you would have been convinced... the PURE card can do raytracing about 400% faster than a top of the line P4. just reading the part about them inventing a cpu specifically made for rendering will tell you that x86 is not the only way to go. since the x86 architecture is a general purpouse cpu and theirs is a specific purpouse one you could see the benefits preformance wise of doing it that way...

how about it?

jeotero
Posts: 107
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 5:31 am

Postby jeotero » Fri Feb 13, 2004 11:36 am

I look at this product like 2 years ago, and im sure its nice and useful and it does everything they say..
but just thinking about it, if this was that great in price/performance, why hollywood production houses are not using them ? why do they use render farms ?

1. only works with certain applications (a lot of pcs can render any application not just 3d)

2. its quite expensive :P, compared with the cost of making a small render farm)

Again im not attacking this product , that product looks good, specially the size (i could be completely mistaken)

just my .2 cents

Darqus
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 11:44 pm

Postby Darqus » Fri Feb 13, 2004 3:51 pm

oh hollywood uses them, but they use the bigger version - the render drive. believe it or not, pixar has the most renderdrives in use on the planet in their renderfarm, but they are mainly used for close ups. the only bummer about them is that they are limited by the fairly small amount of onboard memory (768 mb in a 40.000$ machine seems tiny by todays standards) so the renderdrive is a no go for the war scenes in LOTR but yes can do for high quality scenes on a smaller scale such as commercials and logos for gameshows.

the render drive has seen no advances in development for nearly 5 years. i wouldn't be surprised if one could increase the preformance on the render drive by another 1000% by using top of the line components today... :D

unixminion
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 11:29 am

Re: Yafray? - My small conclusion.

Postby unixminion » Wed Feb 18, 2004 1:58 am

ideasman wrote:I had a muck around with yafray/blender intergration as Im sure many of

* Yafrays GI always generates grainyness, looks great and photo-realistic too, but if you dont want grain theres no non grainty GI options (Other then a lighting array?).


Yes there is!

GI: Full
Click Cache

then Graident


whammo smooth lighting

Mac
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 10:38 pm

Postby Mac » Thu Feb 19, 2004 10:53 pm

I've had a very old version of Blender on my comp for years and I played around with it sometimes, but about a week or 2 ago I visited the website and downloaded the new version, it really rocks.

To have raytraced shadows removed some of the old limitations for me and I really like Yafray, but I guess I could use some good tutorials for that (HINT)

It's cool to be an amateur who can actually make some cool 3d graphics with free software.

Keep up the good work, Blender RULES!

Mac :D


Return to “Rendering”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests