[daros]

The post is referred to MW 1.0. You are woking with RC5...

Try to trust tangible facts, never trust words. That's important for your relation with: women, friends, business, religions, politics...

[leoA4D]

Man, its getting complicated...But in any case, the return of the co op feature is positive, no doubt...

Exactly. RS2? I cannot tell from Victor's announcement. My point is that the "glass is half full" crowd gets angry when the other half says that NL is cancelling promises they made or changing the game without telling why. I do not remember NL or anyone else saying the system requirements include access to x-number of CPUs or a render farm in order to use MW.

NL is the only source for official information. Everyone else interprets NL's emails/announcements or has an opinion.

[daros]

"I do not remember NL or anyone else saying the system requirements include access to x-number of CPUs or a render farm in order to use MW. "

They as well don't tell that you need to plug your computer to power a connector.

To make a certain kind of production you need more CPU's. It's obvius.

[aitraaz]

That's important for your relation with: women

Ah, some true wisdom...

[Kabe]

Nobody bought M~R for speed, I'm with you on that.
Yes, cooperative rendering is useful.

No, it's not that "time barriers are broken and are no longer an issue".
M~R hasn't got any faster except for one special case, which is rendering
a single image, provided you have multiple machines.

Speed certainly isn't my personal main concern, but I have problems to
stay calm by this constant stream of false promises, exaggerations, false
advertisement and igorance that NL calls company communication.

They have got our money, we still don't have the product.
It's that simple, and NL is to blame, not the users.

Kabe

[Mihai]

But why take things so much out of context? You want communication, they just showed a feature that will be added, and even an improved version of what coop rendering was before.

But the general response was: this sucks, I thought Maxwell would get faster by it's own, I don't have a 9 CPU renderfarm.......and aha! this is just a fake, it's just blending pixels together.....nice "discussion".

What has been said, what hasn't been said??.......it's just an email showing coop rendering. They really have to think about every possible interpretation and response of every phrase they write in every email? Stop dissecting every little thing.

So this last email was also part of this constant stream of false promises and exaggerations?

Is there ANYTHING good about this email? Anything at all? Why has this email upset you, more than actually making you happier? This is what I can't comprehend......

[Kabe]

So this last email was also part of this constant stream of false promises and exaggerations?

To say "time barriers are broken and are no longer an issue" certainly
sounds like an exaggeration to me.

Kabe

[daros]

"Lead, follow, or get out of the way."

sounds like Thomas Hobbes...

[Maxer]

You guy's are right despite what Mihai says, the concept that NL has always planned on using cooperative renderings to overcome speed issues is bogus. It's a great feature and one that needs to be included in a well rounded rendering package but it shouldn’t be necessary to use it in every situation simply to get out a descent sized image. That severely cripples the software and makes it much more expensive for everyone.

[rivoli]

sounds like Thomas Hobbes...

i guess that's Thomas Paine.

[Mihai]

For many months you have spewed sarcasm and ridicule on the legitimate concerns of anyone who doesn't worship at Victors feet. So when we get into the technical details of how this feature works your only contribution is to be disrespectful and condescending to us all?

What rubbish. I explained several times in that thread how the cooperative feature is not something done at the pixel level, that even if you have many low sl mxi's, you can merge them together. I wasn't being nasty, until posts such as:

Just what I thought...you aren't removing the noise, you're HIDING it. But its still there, in your so-called unbiased image. If you average noise into an image you are lowering the quality of the 'good' (non-noise, actual data) pixels. You are not refining the image, you are degrading it. You are using a trick to get past a flaw.

Let's say you have 8 cans of soup and 1 can of poop, but can't tell which is which. Is the answer to put all 9 into one pot and eat from it? You first.

Will the radical supporters please chime in and explain how this is not a move backwards for Maxwell and its unbiased accuracy, please?

That's not an "enlightening technical discussion", which suddenly you feel like being part of, it's simply trashing something you don't even have a clue about. And you're the one accusing me of being disrespectful and condescending....

[Maxer]

FIGHT!!!!!

[Leonardo]

well i am very happy coop render works now....

cheers
stefan

ehhh... well, can't say for sure it works... I mean RC1 was able to do this http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8079



leo

[Olivier Cugniet]

that was not RC1

[Leonardo]

that was not RC1

lol... or at least no the one that we got