650x488

1609659061801.jpg

๐Ÿงต Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 866408

>tfw Renderman for Blender 24.2 NC
Does it get any better than this, bros?

Anonymous No. 866419

Using an actual good host program for RM would be a start.

498x498

1634902881600.gif

Anonymous No. 866436

>publishes RenderMan for Blender
>keeps it updated
What does Pixar mean by this?

Anonymous No. 866471

>>866436
They do this to get new talent that is already familiar with their software i would think

Anonymous No. 866499

>>866408
Is GPU rendering now supported by the NC?

Anonymous No. 866511

>>866499
forget about the gpu. It doesnt support lama. Prman without lama is garbage.

Anonymous No. 866526

>>866408
How hard is it for a Cycles user to get into Renderman?

Anonymous No. 866530

actually a bit more excited by the new octane.
the new caustics stuff is magic.

Anonymous No. 866531

>>866511
>Prman without lama is garbage.
You are garbage.

Anonymous No. 866567

>>866526
its easy. Unfortunately this Renderman for Blender isnt production ready and I reccommend another dcc

Anonymous No. 866824

renderman needs to hurry the fuck up with full GPU rendering, they've already fallen behind so many renderers

Anonymous No. 866831

>>866824
>they've already fallen behind so many renderers
Bullshit. RM is for studio environments. It scales very well on CPU farms. That is its primary intent. Not single workstation use. Dumbass midwit.

Anonymous No. 866864

>>866831
You can make beautiful stills on a "single workstation" and with denoising you can get very far with previz animations you absolute idiot.

Anonymous No. 866890

>>866864
Your sound like a hobbyist. Begone amateur.

Anonymous No. 866892

>>866890
I've made more money doing 3dcg than 99% of posters on this board.

Anonymous No. 867017

>>866892
So did I. What's your point, hobbyist?

Anonymous No. 867035

>>867017
show me some respect you idiot. I'm better at this than you are and by your posts you don't know what the f you are talking about.

Anonymous No. 867036

>>866892
the number of people who care is zero

Anonymous No. 867037

>>866892
>>867017

nobody really cares

Anonymous No. 867038

>>866864
>>867035
>>866892
>I'm an idiot

Anon's right, if you can throw enough cores at renderman it btfos even multi-gpu renderers
>b-but muh-!
"enough cores" means distributing a single shot over 10+ machines mounting 32 physical cores and 256GB ram each, and where scenes can take up all that ram and would never fit even on high-end GPU VRAMs
i.e. no "single person on a single workstation" will ever have those numbers and as a result, any gpu renderer will outperform renderman.
Pixar, ILM, WDAS will though.

GPU rendering vs CPU is like the new Blender vs. everything else.

Anonymous No. 867043

>>867038
>GPU rendering vs CPU is like the new Blender vs. everything else.
what do you mean you retard? No sculpting, no tex, no sims, no animation

Anonymous No. 869888

>>866531
He may be, but he's not wrong though.

Anonymous No. 870020

Is it 3.0 compatible?

Anonymous No. 870290

>>870020
no, and its buggy as fuck

Anonymous No. 870299

>>870290
came here to ask this too.
I'm used to maya/renderman. I'm on a dual xeon ws with an a6000 and followed the renderman github precisely on versions and compability.
Shit is still crashing so much it's impossible to work with. Maybe it's the dual CPU set-up, but I've never had a problem with it in Maya.
Big blender fan unironically, love renderman, wish this shit was stable for me to play around with.