C4D

Out of context: Reply #35

  • Started
  • Last post
  • 165 Responses
  • Julesvm0

    I just finished a big gig on Arnold... I've used Octane in the past and I'm conflicted

    On one hand Arnold is bullet proof... doesn't blink at heavy geo, and that was a life saver. But if you want high quality grain free results, it's still very slow. We were getting ~1hour frames.

    Octane is super fast, but requires expensive GPUs and honestly a switch off of OSX - haven't pulled the trigger on either.

    I also think Arnold is way easier to use.

    Julesvm 0Permalink
    UpvoteDownvote
    Flag
    • Also worth noting that the Arnold debs have been teasing a GPU version of Arnold to be released soonJulesvm
    • Also when I'm thinking back to Octane days I was getting similar render times when I cranked the settings, but that was on 5year old hardwareJulesvm
    • I'm on a 12 core trash can with 32 GB RAM. Thanks for the input.CyBrainX
    • Ran into the same problems when testing Arnold. From what I have read, using various passes to diagnose what takes the time ie. grain/noise is the way to go.face_melter
    • Despite being balls-deep in Vray, I'm impressed with Arnold. Took no time to fathom it out and get it running, even recreating difficult Vray materials.face_melter
    • CyBrain Unless you want to get off the Mac Pro you should def go ArnoldJulesvm
    • I will buy a PC for home but I got my company to spend about $10k on my Mac Pro last year so getting a new computer at work isn't an option for a while.CyBrainX
    Show [[ numHiddenNotes ]] more notesAdd Note
    SaveCancel

View thread