[numerobis]

it seems like they needed to make as much money as possible fast

Yes, i thought this too. This would be the only logical explanation to me why they released it this way. Why else would you sacrifice the rest of your trustworthiness, ripping off your user base with a completely exaggerated and inconsistent licensing model to sell them an unfinished buggy product?

[choo-chee]

that's why I've started this tread... not fair to us, nor fair to devs themselves working hard to the wrong directions. In my eyes, the way maxwell 4 was depicted by NL, was "come get SL 20 for the same time as SL 10".... NOT!
buy hey, at least we got multi light app, we really really really needed it! NOT!

[Mihai]

Direct question: in past it worked fine, using it daily. Will you consider to fix it or it will stay forverer bugged like these last 9 months?
I need only a YES or a NO, so i can decide what to do and stop hoping, while looking fire preview, where it works.

Thanks for that example. I can just say that I have no influence on which bugs are prioritize, I can only suggest that you contact again tech support so it's brought to their attention again. If it worked ok before, it's a good sign it's not one of those difficult bugs to fix.

[T0M0]

So what are your current plans ?
Is Maxwell 4.0.1 (or even 4.1) "around the corner" ?

Some informations would be really appreciated.

[luis.hijarrubia]

Although we have some developments ongoing (and some already working) for 4.1, the next logical big step (I don't know if the next early build) should be 4.0.1. being something like "what we liked to had in October" with most main rendering errors on GPU solved and GPU working on Linux and Mac.

I know that you would kill for additives. Don't worry, I will push it on next meeting to do it asap.

[Herbo]

Although we have some developments ongoing (and some already working) for 4.1, the next logical big step (I don't know if the next early build) should be 4.0.1. being something like "what we liked to had in October" with most main rendering errors on GPU solved and GPU working on Linux and Mac.

I know that you would kill for additives. Don't worry, I will push it on next meeting to do it asap.

That sounds great! Especially about pushing additives that would make the engine actually usable for some production work.

[luis.hijarrubia]

http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... 13&t=44247
hemmm.. for who renders hundreds of elevations per year, the thread linked above is an "hole", not simple a bug.
And after months from request i had no useful update/solution. (and you know, the suggested workaround does not produce same result: depth is always visibile).

Fixed. If support doesn't see any collateral issue with this should be public on .16 or .17

[Luca_Studioaltieri]

Thank you Mihai and Luis!!

[mdfmuse]

Getting there...

Thanks to the Next Limit team for the latest early release Maxwell Studio and Maxwell Render, released just a few days ago. There are some improvements evident in the code. Yet GPU rendering still isn't there.

When I test render a Maxwell scene which is very basic (no reflection/refraction passes; no additive layers; etc) using GPU, the speed-up in render time is really good compared to CPU rendering! This gives me hope that there is light at the end of the tunnel for Maxwell v4, as the speed increase is very noticeable. Hoping for promised support for dual GPU cards soon, as I can foresee that doubling the GPU power will really make Maxwell fly fast.

When I test render a Maxwell scene which is more complex (and complex scenes are probably 80% of what I do), I of course receive pre-render errors in Maxwell Render. These include: "Material (xxx) has additive layers, which are still not supported in the GPU engine", and "Reflection/Refraction p[asses are still not supported in the GPU engine and will be disabled for rendering."

Hoping Next Limit is perhaps just a couple months away from Maxwell v4 being able to fully use the GPU in rendering.