[trick]

In any case, with the speed issue, you're always up against a grotesque amount of math that needs to get done. It's not like if you just optimized the software enough, it'd run in realtime. At some point, there's just a dependence on how much processor power there is, which is fortunately improving daily. But like I said, it's not like NL chooses speed OR features. Everybody wants everything to go faster. It's just that there's only so much you can do before it's up to the processor(s) again.

_Mike

As much as I hate too admit, you're absolutely right...BUT... I once bought Lightscape in a time it cost over $3500, while machines (even the SGI Indigo2) couldn't get up to speed with it. Consequently with pressing deadlines I often used scanline rendering to get my jobs done. If I HAD time and if the client insisted on the most beautiful images I just let LS cook. However by the time machines where fast enough for conveniently working with LS there was much better software on the market that did not force me to use a plethora of workarounds like in LS. And there is the danger in your reasoning...

[Lutz]

i think it's great that we get an upgrade and that we have nothing to pay for it. For me it's equal which name the upgrade has 1.2 or 1.5. It's more important which futures the update has. I think NL do the best they can do. So i can not understand the long discussion here. For me is more important that the new version run and has not to much bug's.

[jfrancis]

Will it work with Maya 7? Or will I have to upgrade Maya?

[deadalvs]

it will work up to maya 8.5, also the rest of the older versions !

[deadalvs]

a citation of Steven S. Skiena, from «the algorithm design manual»
ISBN: 978-0-387-94860-7

the guy:
http://www.cs.sunysb.edu/~skiena/

citation:
«
1.1.2 Efficiency (page 9)
the skilled algorithm designer is an efficiency expert. through cunning and experience we seek to get jobs done as quickly as possible. the benefits of finding an efficient algorithm for a computationally expensive job can be mindboggling, as illustrated by several of the war stories scattered through this book. Section 2.7 shows how clever algorithms yielded a program that was 30'000 times faster than our initial attempt!

upon realizing that a given application runs too slowly, the practical person usually asks the boss to buy them a faster machine. sometimes this is the cheapest option. however, the potential win from faster hardware is typically limited to a factor ten or so, due to technical constraints (they don't make faster machines) or economic ones (the boss won't pay for it).
to realize larger performance improvements, we must seek better algorithms. as we will show, a faster algorithm running on a slower computer will always win for sufficiently large instances. always. usually, problems don't have to get very large before the faster algorithm wins.
be aware that there are situations where finding the most efficient algorithm for a job is a complete waste of programmer effort. in any program, there is usually one bottleneck that takes the majority of computing time. the typical claim is that 90% of the run time of any program is spent in 10% of the code. optimizing the other 90% of the run time will have little impact on the total run time. further, many programs are written with only one or two special instances in mind. if the program will be run just a few times, or if the job can be easily be run overnight, it probably does not pay to make the programmer work harder in order to reduce cycle consumption.
»

* * *

well, this piece of text can of course be interpreted as desired. i just guess that in a program with (i don't know) two or four million lines of code, a «few optimizations» should be possible. we also know that the algorithms for correct light support exist also for over 20 years and they don't just change overnight.
i just guess it would be possible to have maxwell running faster with different algorithms... it's a fight that is never-ending, i guess.

[lllab]

well daedalvs,

if all can be made so much faster,we can tell some countries that they dont need super computer mainframes to simuklate their a-bombs.

they shall just improve their code and run it on a normal pc;-)

i am very sure, aslo seeing from other engines that mw is already very close to the possible "30000x speed" improvment...

actually for what it calculates t is the fastest i know....

cheers
stefan

[deadalvs]

yes, let's tell them ...

* * *

of course, the optimization of a near-perfect algorithm is very complex, that's what we're all talking about. but it's just one point of view.

every user can take a side:
1) buy faster machines (blame hardware)
2) wish for faster algorithms (blame NL)

since there are always people on two sides, the problem can not really be solved. the only acceptable answer is «we're doing our best» and i trust NL that they also mean it.

* * *

certainly i'd like to have a million teraflops and unlimited ram to my disposal, but the further we come in history the further we try to live in a utopian future... for example where we try to save the world's peace with nuclear bombs...

[Hybaj]

The speed for what maxwell does is definitely sufficient. 1.5 should be about old promised features, stability and maybe even some extra stuff. It's gonna be called "one point five" afterall

I just hope that the NL's high priests of marketing will allow Nicole to show us more than just a small amount of features. Showing just a tip of the iceberg and then bragging about how better it has become is not the best way to motivate people.

[deadalvs]

and to be honest ... isn't it like this that every maxwell user hates to share this technology with other users that in a few days reach the same level of realism?
don't we hate the fact that there's not gonna be anything more realistic than maxwell in our lives again after the software's completed?

i do enjoy people hating me for the quality of 1/2 hour renderings that are more realistic than their 4 hours photoshop postworked images.

but i know this will come to an end in a few years where all people will have perfect realistic and baby-simple tools to their hand and it's gonna be all over again: only the creative people will be famous. it's like going back to pencil and paper.

why are we getting so mad because of lacking tools in a yet underdeveloped renderer and not be able to admit that one would like to change to an other renderer? the human being is a creature that likes being socially accepted and admired... why are these values so damn enormously strong with some people? i see a strong disbalance here...

of course, the investment in a software is money and hell yes, some people invested a lot in maxwell... i am aware of that. thus, the interest in a fast development is high, but please people, therapist bills will be higher if You don't settle down a little. here i come back to NL's «we're trying to do our best» and that's what we're paying for. not a damn release number.

[b-kandor]

Also, don't forget the very real possiblity that maxwell already uses 'the most efficient' algorithm. This is entirely possible!

[deadalvs]

yes, entirely possible...

but also the fact that it wasn't programmed in assembler makes me think...

* * *

trust me, i like maxwell the way it is ! and i do not blame the code. based on my technical knowledge about programming (which is relatively close to zero except for some basic and mel scripting) i wouldn't dare to say «make it better. NOW !» ...

i blame my hardware and i want more... moooore !!!

[KurtS]

i blame my hardware and i want more... moooore !!!

according to the speed test topic, you shouldn't be blaming your hardware...

[deadalvs]

i do despite that ...

* * *

i am insatiable in rendering speed... a weakness of mine.

[mmhnemo]

I got MW running on my new Workstation (8 Core) and im satisfied with its speed for now.
The most crucial part is to get quick previews in a quality that lets you judge possible mistakes with materials and lighting. If this is provided i can live with rendering images overnight.
Now give me the promised features!

[deadalvs]

hehe, trust me, mmhnemo, that feeling won't last long !