[b-kandor]

But its still there, in your so-called unbiased image.

I hope you will all agree that the whole tone of what you referred to as a technical discussion was essentially pure vitriol. Thinly masked hatred / disgust of Maxwell which is so unproductive. The discussions arn't about finding answers, instead they are focused on finding how many new ways your life is being ruined by a piece of software. I have to say I find it absolutely and completely bizarre. I'm very glad that none of you 'detractors' are my customers - wow. You engender the very worst aspects of our litigious 'you owe me' society. Is there a human amongst you. Undercover maybe......

And before it comes up again - yes deadlines and promises have been broken - how shocking. Seriously, what else is new, the best laid plans and all that. Have a heart for a change before I think you're all just a bunch of lawyers in disguise.

Cheers!

[Maxer]

I can't stand newbie’s like you. You come in to this forum 2 months ago and think you know about everything that has happened in the last year. If you’re happy bending over and taking it that's fine it's your business but don't come in here telling me I'm wrong because you think you’re above it all.

[JDHill]

...meanwhile, getting back to topic...

...it would be interesting to see the nine images that were merged.

Well, there are no images, just .mxi. If you opened them independently in the Maxwell viewer, all you'd see is nine images with various (but different) levels of noise.

So, it can't be stressed enough in this discussion, to understand that we are not combining images, but .mxi data. Let's say you have a big scene to render. In theory, there is one correct solution for all of the light contained in that scene, given a certain camera. Maxwell's mission is to resolve all of this data. So, at the point of combination, each participating .mxi contributes a certain amount of resolved data, albeit a different slice than the others.

~JD

[rivoli]

So, it can't be stressed enough in this discussion, to understand that we are not combining images, but .mxi data.

very good point. which reminds me of an old post by juan, but I'm not 100% sure it was him, who said that the merging part of different MXIs was by no mean trivial as one might think. too bad I can't find that post now.

but then again, MXIs are images (with a very high dynamic range but still images), aren't they?

[JDHill]

@Ernest, I don't believe that is exactly how to see it either. Each .mxi is exactly not responsible for any pre-defined part of the scene or spectrum. Each one resolves for the same data, just with a different starting point, and with slightly different path mutation.

@Rivoli, true, I was mostly trying to point out that there seems to be a mental block when we start to talk about 'images', as we have generally used this term when talking about a traditional bitmap. HDRIs are very much more synonymous, I think, to this discussion --> several images being combined, obviously not for the purpose of noise removal, but to store a representation of the energy present in a scene which is closer to reality than any traditional type of 'image' could.

~JD

*** obligatory disclaimer: this is obviously just my interpretation of what I saw at work in Victor's and Tom's videos showing mxcl.exe's new capabilities. I believe that this is also the reason that these seemingly unrelated (coop. & adjustable lights) capabilities were originally unveiled in the same video --> these two features are kissin' cousins ***

[Kabe]

And before it comes up again - yes deadlines and promises have been broken - how shocking. Seriously, what else is new, the best laid plans and all that. Have a heart for a change before I think you're all just a bunch of lawyers in disguise.

Let's hear you in 10 months if there's still no product, or try to put yourself
in our shoes. It's pretty easy to stay calm in the first months, but it wears
thin over time, I can guarantee you that. You should be a *lot* more careful
judging people.

Kabe

[leoA4D]

In 10 months MW may be challenged by some serious (upcoming+) competition.

[JDHill]

Again, getting back to the discussion, here's why the Maxwell implementation (.mxi combination) of cooperative rendering is so advantageous (names removed to protect the innocent):

[renderer name] supports DR [Distributed Rendering]. It divides the frame into regions and spreads them across the participants in the distributed rendering.

Does anyone see the difference?

~JD

[daros]

generally the region rendering has many disadvantages compared to coopeative render.

1) each CPu has a task with differnt complexity( bucket or region).
2) problems with heterogeneous renderfarms.
3) not able to increase or decrease the total aoumont of cpu's for a single rendering during rendering process.
4) absolutly not MLT friendly.
5) less linear scalability caused to too small buckets or regions.

[Kabe]

Well, it is indeed an advantage to distribute sampling over the whole image
area instead of sampling regions, because you get quick intermediate
results and you can stop rendering at any time, no matter how different the
machines are.
I supect that the "resume render" feature we once had (well, on the PC...)
was pretty much the same thing. It is indeed impressive what they do with
the MXI format.

Anyway, RC 5 is now five weeks old and it's about time to deliver the real
thing. I don't care much about their lab success stories - we had great
stories with RC tat was suppose to blow us away...

Kabe

[Maxer]

I don't thing were going to see RC6 or what ever it's called any time soon, check out this thread.

http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... sc&start=0

[Kabe]

OUCH. Well, some time for the newbies around here to get accustomed

Kabe

[lllab]

i calculated:

image A: 10h with 2x2.2= 4,4ghz

image B 2,5h with 9x2ghz=18ghz

4x 4,4 = ca 18

10 :4 = 2,5

so it is almost linear double ghz = double speed = very cool!

thanks NL

i might be the only one here but me cooprender makes very very happy!

cheers
stefan

[daros]

you are not the only one .

[Frances]

...so it is almost linear double ghz = double speed = very cool!

thanks NL

i might be the only one here but me cooprender makes very very happy!

cheers
stefan

I am very happy that we will have coop. rendering back. Also I was concerned a while back with "degradation" of returns with each CPU. I don't understand what that was even all about - I'm just glad it's not an issue now!

Even though I'm a freelancer, I have two licenses and a little stable of computers that could be put to good use.