Loading...
Move over Rasterization and Ra… > > >Move over Rasterization and Ra…

Move over Rasterization and Ray Tracing, Path Tracing is the future..

Ghosty12Ghosty12 Posts: 2,077
in The Commons

Came across this video from AdoredTV which at the start talks about old computers and games, but it is a lead up to computer graphics and at about 15.55 minutes in he talks about Path Tracing and how it is even better than Ray Tracing.. And all I can say is that Path Tracing looks to be impressive indeed, and that it seems that Octane 4 will support Path Tracing..

Comments

  • JonnyRayJonnyRay Posts: 1,744

    Really interesting video. I like to see videos and discussions about "what's coming". But this has the added benefit that he's projecting that we're not a decade away from this technology. In fact near the end he makes the point that Nvidia may have been able to do this with the Turing architecture, but they would have had to sacrifice so much legacy compatibility speed that they would have had a hard time getting consumers to make the switch. It was interesting that he projects we'll see this on next gen consoles before we see it on our GPU boards for that same reason.

  • SorelSorel Posts: 1,407
    Octane has had path tracing tho? At least that is what the kernel is called in all the versions I've used.
  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 104,134

    I thought Iray was a path tracer?

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 41,383

    ...fascinating. 

    Yeah, Octane4 is sounding better and better.  Part of the reason I am setting up a dual system work station setup so I can perform offline rendering while being able to move on to the next project.

  • RobotHeadArtRobotHeadArt Posts: 917

    Many render engines are already path tracers.  The advancements discussed in the video are around getting path tracing close to real time through the use of new advancements plus denoisers.

  • Sven DullahSven Dullah Posts: 7,621

    3Deligh has been a path tracer for years, aweSurface has now unlocked this feature for end users.

  • Rashad CarterRashad Carter Posts: 1,807

    Pathracing is simply a more robust manner of raytracing. Same underlying principles. Most truly unbiased engines are involved in some form of pathtracing. Octane is simply the best known example. Octane has been a pathtracer since its first release, there's nothing new about it.

    This is the main difference between Iray and Octane. Octane can be unbiased when uisng the Pathtracing or PMC (Populated Monte Carlo) rendering kernels, Iray simply cannot because it doesnt priovide an unbiased kernel as far as I know. Though Iray is a PBR engine it is not truly unbiased, and this is one of the reasons why Iray is more complicated to use than Octane, and why Octane can often look "better" for indescribeable reasons.

    There's nothing not to love with Octane, truthfully. I mean with enough effort anyone can convince themselves to hate anything, but seriously OToy is doing some of the best work in the industry and is currently unmatched in my view. Lots of great engines out there, but fully unbiased to the level of Octane and with amazing speed to boot, no one else can do that as of now.

  • nonesuch00nonesuch00 Posts: 18,441
    edited November 2018

    Unity & the other game engines are making big strides on this 'real time path tracing'. I guess nVideo & AMD are big contributors to those advancements. 

    Post edited by nonesuch00 on
  • outrider42outrider42 Posts: 3,679

    AdoredTV is an interesting channel. He does a tech news update everyday, and has several videos that cover the history of tech, as well as he thinks it is going. If you enjoy this you should check out his video about the history of AMD vs Nvidia. That video does not talk about Turing, but you can use the information to consider how Turing was made. For example, he talks about the issues with manufacturing a large die size, and given some reports of 2080ti problems, you can better understand the challenges the large 2080ti chip may face.

  • Ghosty12Ghosty12 Posts: 2,077

    Downloaded the Octane 3 demo and it is good, the one thing I found doing a very simple render in this case just one figure and a hdr, I got a 10 degree difference on my GTX 1070ti between direct lighting rendering and path trace rendering.. In that PT rendering was 10 degrees hotter, so can only imagine what it would be like on a complete scene..

  • DustRiderDustRider Posts: 2,803

    Interesting, My system and card actually run cooler with Octane than with Iray.

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 41,383
    Sven Dullah said:

    3Deligh has been a path tracer for years, aweSurface has now unlocked this feature for end users.

    ...I know, can't wait until I am fully up and running again to work with it.

  • Ghosty12Ghosty12 Posts: 2,077
    DustRider said:

    Interesting, My system and card actually run cooler with Octane than with Iray.

    Only way I use iRay is in CPU mode for when I am just messing around, so no idea what temp my card would have if using my GPU in iRay.. The one issue I had with the demo was being unable to add in an emmissive setting in the node edit mode so guessing it is due to it being a demo only..

  • outrider42outrider42 Posts: 3,679
    What is the temp? It may well still be in spec. But I don't see how it runs hotter than it does with Iray, Iray pushes the GPU to 100% nonstop for the length of the render. There really should be no difference at all. As always, I recommend using fan controlling software if you don't already. The stock settings on most GPUs are just not aggressive enough IMO for what Iray and other engines throw at them.
  • Ghosty12Ghosty12 Posts: 2,077
    outrider42 said:
    What is the temp? It may well still be in spec. But I don't see how it runs hotter than it does with Iray, Iray pushes the GPU to 100% nonstop for the length of the render. There really should be no difference at all. As always, I recommend using fan controlling software if you don't already. The stock settings on most GPUs are just not aggressive enough IMO for what Iray and other engines throw at them.

    Running iRay my 1070ti runs in the low to mid 60's, the fan is set to kick in at 62 degrees.. Funny thing today even Octane made it run in the low to mid 60's as well, though it does have a cutoff of 90 degrees in Octane..

  • joseftjoseft Posts: 310
    Rashad Bryce-Carrara said:

    Pathracing is simply a more robust manner of raytracing. Same underlying principles. Most truly unbiased engines are involved in some form of pathtracing. Octane is simply the best known example. Octane has been a pathtracer since its first release, there's nothing new about it.

    This is the main difference between Iray and Octane. Octane can be unbiased when uisng the Pathtracing or PMC (Populated Monte Carlo) rendering kernels, Iray simply cannot because it doesnt priovide an unbiased kernel as far as I know. Though Iray is a PBR engine it is not truly unbiased, and this is one of the reasons why Iray is more complicated to use than Octane, and why Octane can often look "better" for indescribeable reasons.

    There's nothing not to love with Octane, truthfully. I mean with enough effort anyone can convince themselves to hate anything, but seriously OToy is doing some of the best work in the industry and is currently unmatched in my view. Lots of great engines out there, but fully unbiased to the level of Octane and with amazing speed to boot, no one else can do that as of now.

     

    Totally agree about Otoy leading the industry, from a technical perspective, Octane is incredible. 

    But i dont agree about there being nothing not to love. My only gripe with octane is certain things can be difficult to achieve, things that are easy with other renderers. That is generally down to the shader structure, where many other renderers have dedicated shaders that are designed for certain things, whereas Octane shaders are more generic. 

    The biggest example here is rendering skin. Renderers like arnold, vray and redshift have dedicated skin shaders that produce amazing results easily. It is easy to get skin to look like it is real, like it is more than just a very thin layer on top of the geometry. Replicating that in Octane isnt easy or quick. My attempts at getting comparable results rendering skin in Octane as opposed to Redshift has led to a great deal of fustration.

     

     

  • Ghosty12Ghosty12 Posts: 2,077
    joseft said:
    Rashad Bryce-Carrara said:

    Pathracing is simply a more robust manner of raytracing. Same underlying principles. Most truly unbiased engines are involved in some form of pathtracing. Octane is simply the best known example. Octane has been a pathtracer since its first release, there's nothing new about it.

    This is the main difference between Iray and Octane. Octane can be unbiased when uisng the Pathtracing or PMC (Populated Monte Carlo) rendering kernels, Iray simply cannot because it doesnt priovide an unbiased kernel as far as I know. Though Iray is a PBR engine it is not truly unbiased, and this is one of the reasons why Iray is more complicated to use than Octane, and why Octane can often look "better" for indescribeable reasons.

    There's nothing not to love with Octane, truthfully. I mean with enough effort anyone can convince themselves to hate anything, but seriously OToy is doing some of the best work in the industry and is currently unmatched in my view. Lots of great engines out there, but fully unbiased to the level of Octane and with amazing speed to boot, no one else can do that as of now.

     

    Totally agree about Otoy leading the industry, from a technical perspective, Octane is incredible. 

    But i dont agree about there being nothing not to love. My only gripe with octane is certain things can be difficult to achieve, things that are easy with other renderers. That is generally down to the shader structure, where many other renderers have dedicated shaders that are designed for certain things, whereas Octane shaders are more generic. 

    The biggest example here is rendering skin. Renderers like arnold, vray and redshift have dedicated skin shaders that produce amazing results easily. It is easy to get skin to look like it is real, like it is more than just a very thin layer on top of the geometry. Replicating that in Octane isnt easy or quick. My attempts at getting comparable results rendering skin in Octane as opposed to Redshift has led to a great deal of fustration.

     

     

    Looking at the Redshift website, I find it interesting that it is a GPU accelerated biased render engine, just a shame that it is not ment for programs like Poser or Daz Studio, ie not supported.. :(

  • bluejauntebluejaunte Posts: 1,936
    Rashad Bryce-Carrara said:

    Pathracing is simply a more robust manner of raytracing. Same underlying principles. Most truly unbiased engines are involved in some form of pathtracing. Octane is simply the best known example. Octane has been a pathtracer since its first release, there's nothing new about it.

    This is the main difference between Iray and Octane. Octane can be unbiased when uisng the Pathtracing or PMC (Populated Monte Carlo) rendering kernels, Iray simply cannot because it doesnt priovide an unbiased kernel as far as I know. Though Iray is a PBR engine it is not truly unbiased, and this is one of the reasons why Iray is more complicated to use than Octane, and why Octane can often look "better" for indescribeable reasons.

    There's nothing not to love with Octane, truthfully. I mean with enough effort anyone can convince themselves to hate anything, but seriously OToy is doing some of the best work in the industry and is currently unmatched in my view. Lots of great engines out there, but fully unbiased to the level of Octane and with amazing speed to boot, no one else can do that as of now.

    I don't know, I'm not seeing an awful lot of impressive renders come out of Octane. It always seems to be V-Ray, which may have to do with the archviz industry using that renderer so heavily and that stuff always looks so incredible.

  • Rashad CarterRashad Carter Posts: 1,807
    bluejaunte said:
    Rashad Bryce-Carrara said:

    Pathracing is simply a more robust manner of raytracing. Same underlying principles. Most truly unbiased engines are involved in some form of pathtracing. Octane is simply the best known example. Octane has been a pathtracer since its first release, there's nothing new about it.

    This is the main difference between Iray and Octane. Octane can be unbiased when uisng the Pathtracing or PMC (Populated Monte Carlo) rendering kernels, Iray simply cannot because it doesnt priovide an unbiased kernel as far as I know. Though Iray is a PBR engine it is not truly unbiased, and this is one of the reasons why Iray is more complicated to use than Octane, and why Octane can often look "better" for indescribeable reasons.

    There's nothing not to love with Octane, truthfully. I mean with enough effort anyone can convince themselves to hate anything, but seriously OToy is doing some of the best work in the industry and is currently unmatched in my view. Lots of great engines out there, but fully unbiased to the level of Octane and with amazing speed to boot, no one else can do that as of now.

    I don't know, I'm not seeing an awful lot of impressive renders come out of Octane. It always seems to be V-Ray, which may have to do with the archviz industry using that renderer so heavily and that stuff always looks so incredible.

    Yes, this is indeed the case. Most Vray users are industry professionals not hobbyists. Most of them are professionally trained in 3d art, and are working with high end resources at all stages of development. Crazy high poly modesl, crazy high res textures, no sidestepping or cheating for the sake of saving resources. Most of these guys are master modelers which makes very realistic renders. They will often use billboard humans figures because ther's no way they could get the humans to match the quality and believeability of the other surfaces in the scene.

  • joseftjoseft Posts: 310
    bluejaunte said:
    Rashad Bryce-Carrara said:

    Pathracing is simply a more robust manner of raytracing. Same underlying principles. Most truly unbiased engines are involved in some form of pathtracing. Octane is simply the best known example. Octane has been a pathtracer since its first release, there's nothing new about it.

    This is the main difference between Iray and Octane. Octane can be unbiased when uisng the Pathtracing or PMC (Populated Monte Carlo) rendering kernels, Iray simply cannot because it doesnt priovide an unbiased kernel as far as I know. Though Iray is a PBR engine it is not truly unbiased, and this is one of the reasons why Iray is more complicated to use than Octane, and why Octane can often look "better" for indescribeable reasons.

    There's nothing not to love with Octane, truthfully. I mean with enough effort anyone can convince themselves to hate anything, but seriously OToy is doing some of the best work in the industry and is currently unmatched in my view. Lots of great engines out there, but fully unbiased to the level of Octane and with amazing speed to boot, no one else can do that as of now.

    I don't know, I'm not seeing an awful lot of impressive renders come out of Octane. It always seems to be V-Ray, which may have to do with the archviz industry using that renderer so heavily and that stuff always looks so incredible.

    If you have not seen many impressive octane renders, you cant have been looking very hard. 

    There are probably many more impressive Vray renders that are easier to find than Octane ones, but i put that down mostly to the fact that Vray has been around for a very long time and it was the go-to renderer for the heavy hitters in the industry for most of that time. Its userbase was huge, so it stands to reason there are more quality renders coming from it. Its userbase is still huge, but probably shrinking somewhat to the newer GPU renderers. 

  • joseftjoseft Posts: 310
    edited November 2018
    ghosty12 said:
    joseft said:
    Rashad Bryce-Carrara said:

    Pathracing is simply a more robust manner of raytracing. Same underlying principles. Most truly unbiased engines are involved in some form of pathtracing. Octane is simply the best known example. Octane has been a pathtracer since its first release, there's nothing new about it.

    This is the main difference between Iray and Octane. Octane can be unbiased when uisng the Pathtracing or PMC (Populated Monte Carlo) rendering kernels, Iray simply cannot because it doesnt priovide an unbiased kernel as far as I know. Though Iray is a PBR engine it is not truly unbiased, and this is one of the reasons why Iray is more complicated to use than Octane, and why Octane can often look "better" for indescribeable reasons.

    There's nothing not to love with Octane, truthfully. I mean with enough effort anyone can convince themselves to hate anything, but seriously OToy is doing some of the best work in the industry and is currently unmatched in my view. Lots of great engines out there, but fully unbiased to the level of Octane and with amazing speed to boot, no one else can do that as of now.

     

    Totally agree about Otoy leading the industry, from a technical perspective, Octane is incredible. 

    But i dont agree about there being nothing not to love. My only gripe with octane is certain things can be difficult to achieve, things that are easy with other renderers. That is generally down to the shader structure, where many other renderers have dedicated shaders that are designed for certain things, whereas Octane shaders are more generic. 

    The biggest example here is rendering skin. Renderers like arnold, vray and redshift have dedicated skin shaders that produce amazing results easily. It is easy to get skin to look like it is real, like it is more than just a very thin layer on top of the geometry. Replicating that in Octane isnt easy or quick. My attempts at getting comparable results rendering skin in Octane as opposed to Redshift has led to a great deal of fustration.

     

     

    Looking at the Redshift website, I find it interesting that it is a GPU accelerated biased render engine, just a shame that it is not ment for programs like Poser or Daz Studio, ie not supported.. :(

    Yes, of all the renderers i have tried (Vray, Octane, iRay, Arnold, Cycles, Redshift, Mental Ray & built in renderers in software like Poser's Firefly, 3Delight and C4D's physical and standard renderers) - Redshift is my preffered renderer. Redshift has been growing rapidly in the industry, and for good reason. Take a look at the animated shorts that Blizzard make for Overwatch, those are all done with Redshift. Their pricing model is very good, with subscription options coming soon. Plus, when you buy redshift, you get access to each and every plugin. For other renderers you pay per plugin that you want, which becomes expensive if you use more than one software suite in your workflow. This included Octane, although i believe they are changing that with Octane 4 to try to limit the users that are defecting to Redshift.

    I have been exporting my characters to other software anyway, so the lack of Redshift support for Daz Studio has not affected me. It is unlikely they will ever create plugins for Daz Studio because it will be a small market for them, given the existing iRay integration and the majority of Daz users using that for the plug-and-play usabilty of all the products sold in the daz store being already setup for it. 

    edit - i should also mention that Redshift support is second to none. Their developers are very active on their forums, just about every thread has admin and developer responses, and quickly. I have even seen them offer to have skype/teamviewer conferences with people to help them. 

    Post edited by joseft on
  • WendyLuvsCatzWendyLuvsCatz Posts: 38,873

    this one is free

    http://guerillarender.com/

    I found it too hard to use though the UI sucks more than Blender cheeky

  • Sven DullahSven Dullah Posts: 7,621
    Wendy_Carrara said:

    this one is free

    http://guerillarender.com/

    I found it too hard to use though the UI sucks more than Blender cheeky

    Wow that was a terrible website... tried to find some info on actual content/import options... LOL... and platform compability... nada!

    Am I missing something?

  • WendyLuvsCatzWendyLuvsCatz Posts: 38,873
    Sven Dullah said:
    Wendy_Carrara said:

    this one is free

    http://guerillarender.com/

    I found it too hard to use though the UI sucks more than Blender cheeky

    Wow that was a terrible website... tried to find some info on actual content/import options... LOL... and platform compability... nada!

    Am I missing something?

    no, I had to second guess everything myself, dragging an obj in worked but I was pretty clueless trying to use it and not terribly helpful with tutorials etc

  • ArtiniArtini Posts: 9,805

    And what about Marmoset Toolbag 3 - their renders looks also impresive.

     

  • WendyLuvsCatzWendyLuvsCatz Posts: 38,873

    the user guide

    http://guerillarender.com/doc/2.0/User%20Guide_Quick%20Start_Import%20Scenes%20Files.html

    gives some import options 

     

  • Sven DullahSven Dullah Posts: 7,621
    Wendy_Carrara said:

    the user guide

    http://guerillarender.com/doc/2.0/User%20Guide_Quick%20Start_Import%20Scenes%20Files.html

    gives some import options 

     

    Tks:)

Sign In or Register to comment.
Move over Rasterization and Ra… > > >Move over Rasterization and Ra…