Author Topic: Discussions about people's expectations, Corona developement, life and other things  (Read 6251 times)

2021-06-07, 19:45:06
Reply #45

Feodor

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 116
    • View Profile
I am calm about the transfer of the development of certain functions, since having the ability to access the daily builds, I have long ceased to perceive the concept as the final version, for me the final version is a beautiful presentation on YouTube, a detailed article "What's new", plus information in the blog and that's probably all. The build is not stable? All programs are unstable, I'm used to it. If it takes a year to develop a function, then it means a year, any postponement is a continuation of work, for me the main thing is that it would be implemented and implemented with high quality, and quality does not like haste. I advise you to take it into service.

2021-06-08, 01:27:15
Reply #46

lolec

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 172
    • View Profile
The message explaining the situation is perfect. Completely understandable. It looks like the team is doing the important and not glamorous work that makes Corona great. Sure it takes 15 minuts for the Fstorm guy to implement new flashy features.... how long has it taken him to make a robust production-ready renderer? right... hasn't happened yet.

It takes courage and conviction from the dev team to work on something "no one was asking for" knowing it will make the product much better in the long term.

Again, I think the only mistake was not explaining this before editing the Trello. After reading about how quality and doing the hard work, even knowing people will be mad temporarily, is the most important thing, I feel even more confident that the new tone mapping will be great and I want to spend a little time sending my support and encouragement to compensate some of the comments from people who don't understand the process.

Anyone comparing Corona to buying a product and not getting what you paid for are just trolls. You should pay for software based on the current stable version. If you are paying for a software based on features that are written on a Trello called TENTATIVE ROADMAP, it's completely your fault.   




2021-06-08, 02:02:26
Reply #47

cjwidd

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 1047
    • View Profile
    • Artstation
I think there is a discussion to be had about whether the new Physical Material was worth the dev team required to implement. I know that sounds harsh, but I have not yet found that it significantly improves my shading workflow - I feel like I am deciphering it more than I am wielding it.

2021-06-08, 02:13:45
Reply #48

lolec

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 172
    • View Profile
I think there is a discussion to be had about whether the new Physical Material was worth the dev team required to implement. I know that sounds harsh, but I have not yet found that it significantly improves my shading workflow - I feel like I am deciphering it more than I am wielding it.

Unless you are willing to spend the time they spent discussing the pros and cons, willing to study and understand the industry as well as they do, and most importantly... unless you are willing to suffer the consequences of the decision... NO, you have absolutely no place in that discussion.

If this was a bad decision, they will suffer the consequence. People will stop using their product. You are not even willing to spend the time to understand how to use it, while they spend MONTHS working on it because they think its important, based on information you and I don't have. 

2021-06-08, 02:56:58
Reply #49

cjwidd

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 1047
    • View Profile
    • Artstation
There are two aspects of the implementation that I'm considering, mostly the switch system for selecting whether IOR or specular mode is used as a default - this seems like a way to preserve workflow habits from the Legacy Material - and the sheen layer, which is a kind of built-in falloff map for fabric shading. In general, I'm wondering if users typically resort to falloff maps in lieu of the sheen layer and if they still decouple specular input for artistic control.

The Physical Material also includes presets, built-in clear coat, and an improved diffuse shading model - all of these features seem like improvements in terms of usability. Also, a switch system for global glossiness or roughness parameters was added - a big quality of life improvement.



The high-level goal of the Physical Material was to increase standardization with other render engines and to help prevent the appearance of unrealistic materials that violate energy conservation, etc. On this basis alone, I think the Physical Material is a big win.

2021-06-08, 10:26:45
Reply #50

bluebox

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 268
    • View Profile

Anyone comparing Corona to buying a product and not getting what you paid for are just trolls. You should pay for software based on the current stable version. If you are paying for a software based on features that are written on a Trello called TENTATIVE ROADMAP, it's completely your fault.

I completely understand that you have a Corona altar at your place since you call trolls other people trying to have a discussion, but when I'm buying something and paying for it it's either a product or a service. In this particular example it is not relevant. What is relevant is the fact that part of the SAAS fee covers usage of the product already developed which we rent as a service. The other part goes to I asume current team expenses which consists of current operations in part developing further releases.
Therefore as part of the fee goes to development, expecting a reliable roadmap is completely fine because as cool as your vocal support is Corona Team can operate thanks to the money they earn - material support and income.
Following the above one can and pretty much should expect a roadmap so he or she can decide if the product development plan is in lieu with their business expectations or maybe it is better to support some other package and its development.
If you want to pay for a finished product basing on its current stable version as you call it you should be able to buy a BOX version (since it is a closed product and in that case I agree you can't have any further expectations beyond maintenance plan included) and not pay the monthly fees. You got what you paid for, you can check the current features and you either buy it or not and should not complain.  This is just simple logic. Maybe you should think again ?
« Last Edit: 2021-06-08, 10:36:00 by bluebox »

2021-06-08, 10:49:49
Reply #51

rowmanns

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 1364
    • View Profile
Hi Guys,

I know that there is some tension here and understandably so, but please can we keep this thread dedicated to the current v7 Daily Builds?

Thanks,

Rowan

Please read this before reporting bugs:
How to report issues to us!

2021-06-08, 17:06:29
Reply #52

arqrenderz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 857
  • arqrenderz.com
    • View Profile
    • arqrenderz
Hi Guys,

I know that there is some tension here and understandably so, but please can we keep this thread dedicated to the current v7 Daily Builds?

Thanks,

Rowan
Sorry Rowmanns for the intermission here, just wanted to show my respect for the team, GUYS Please calm down!!
So corona is no longer usable for the tone mapper pushed back so developers can finish it ? How were you making your great images back then ?
I prefer to have a good product instead of a half baked one, i saw the physical mat and its going to change everything, Its a huge change!
We have vray and corona at the office, and i  can say going back to vray is a real pain, everything is super complicated, you have 1000 knobs and check boxes to do a simple thing, corona is just USER friendly and works wonders.
We all want better things, and corona has its flaws we know, but its improving as all .
Thx for making rendering great again.

2021-06-08, 17:29:25
Reply #53

cjwidd

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 1047
    • View Profile
    • Artstation
Yeah the update to support metal / rough is really significant to maintain parity with other render engines and does help improve standardization.

Unfortunately, the Physical Material does break compatibility with the Substance in 3ds Max plugin, but because the Physical Material is built to support metal / rough, updates to the plugin should produce a less complex, more physically accurate shader graph.



2021-06-08, 17:34:33
Reply #54

lupaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 677
    • View Profile
Hi Guys,

I know that there is some tension here and understandably so, but please can we keep this thread dedicated to the current v7 Daily Builds?

Thanks,

Rowan
Sorry Rowmanns for the intermission here, just wanted to show my respect for the team, GUYS Please calm down!!
So corona is no longer usable for the tone mapper pushed back so developers can finish it ? How were you making your great images back then ?
I prefer to have a good product instead of a half baked one, i saw the physical mat and its going to change everything, Its a huge change!
We have vray and corona at the office, and i  can say going back to vray is a real pain, everything is super complicated, you have 1000 knobs and check boxes to do a simple thing, corona is just USER friendly and works wonders.
We all want better things, and corona has its flaws we know, but its improving as all .
Thx for making rendering great again.

You have to look at the big picture. It has nothing to do with respect or not. It's like guys using Maya seeing 3ds max (same parent company) the last few years going fast in development (hypothetically speaking) so they ask for the same kind of resources for the development of the software they use. If anything I'm upset with Chaos group for not putting more resources for Corona, while Vray is getting all the juice. (sorry Rowan).

Disclamer: I don't share the same opinions as Bluebox at all, who should certainly calm down.

2021-06-08, 18:59:03
Reply #55

bluebox

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 268
    • View Profile
Hi Guys,

I know that there is some tension here and understandably so, but please can we keep this thread dedicated to the current v7 Daily Builds?

Thanks,

Rowan
Sorry Rowmanns for the intermission here, just wanted to show my respect for the team, GUYS Please calm down!!
So corona is no longer usable for the tone mapper pushed back so developers can finish it ? How were you making your great images back then ?
I prefer to have a good product instead of a half baked one, i saw the physical mat and its going to change everything, Its a huge change!
We have vray and corona at the office, and i  can say going back to vray is a real pain, everything is super complicated, you have 1000 knobs and check boxes to do a simple thing, corona is just USER friendly and works wonders.
We all want better things, and corona has its flaws we know, but its improving as all .
Thx for making rendering great again.

You have to look at the big picture. It has nothing to do with respect or not. It's like guys using Maya seeing 3ds max (same parent company) the last few years going fast in development (hypothetically speaking) so they ask for the same kind of resources for the development of the software they use. If anything I'm upset with Chaos group for not putting more resources for Corona, while Vray is getting all the juice. (sorry Rowan).

Disclamer: I don't share the same opinions as Bluebox at all, who should certainly calm down.

No idea how you came up with the conclusion I am not calm. Tired of going through this oven and over. Tired mostly of fanboyism here.
1. I haven't said anywhere that the renderer is bad or I fundamentally do not like it. Quite opposite actually.
2. My opinions as I said earlier are not personal against people working at Corona. I do not know personally any of them and it would be quite foolish to think they are personal.
3. My long term opinion about the roadmap still stands -explained many times before and also in previous post. As per your example on Maya I think we actually share quite similiar point of view, maybe I fail to describe it since people still do not understand it.
4.Following the above, I just explained my point of view on the roadmap in the previous post. Was using many anologies many times but people still fail to understand this. So two more:

-think of an election campaign as a roadmap. Politicians promise to introduce new bills etc. That the taxes won't be higher, healthcare will get more attention. After the election nothing changes or is directly opposite. You're satisfied with that ? Gues not. Will you vote the same way if you get hit by unexpected tax and your income declines ?

- your timeframe for realizing a project with the client is a roadmap. You want it to be respected both direcions. If you fail to deliver on time, clients decision making process might get halted, that may lead to not meeting deadlines to finish an interior on time etc. If your client does not send you feedback on time regularly you end up with uproductive time and will have to work extra hours when you start working on other clients projects and then the first client comes back with feedback and demands you finish his visuals first. That puts you in an awkward position.

People memory is short, they mostly do not remember what was promised to them. And my personal view (logic for which I presented many times) is that a roadmap is a form of promise. Only tool that gives some insight on the direction before the "election day". Otherwise we might as well not take into account anything that people say they will do and follow them/buy the product basing on whether we like them or not. Now that would be personal and emotional.

Since business decisions should not be personal and emotional this is the only reason I am vocal about breaking the roadmap. Actually liking the engine makes me feel uncomfortable about thinking that not delivering might become a habit. And we already have one feature that is posponed for several releases (already years pending) - slicer.

Anyway, you guys do with this what you want. I give up and will not come back to the topic since clearly either you go mainstream and unconditionaly love everyone and poke their backs no matter what or you're immediately called a troll. Glad that more likeminded people finaly got the courage to also speak up tho.

I'm done. Best of luck to you all.

Sorry for hijacking the topic Rowan.
« Last Edit: 2021-06-08, 19:17:49 by bluebox »

2021-06-08, 19:44:27
Reply #56

TomG

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 4037
    • View Profile
We've discussed the roadmap before and the "can't please all of the people" that goes with it. If we don't post one, people are upset about not having a clue what we are working on. If we post one, people are upset if things change.

I will note you use the word "promise" and this is why it is called a Tentative roadmap, and right up top on the page is a description with a "How To Read" which says:

"
We believe in keeping you informed about our latest development plans for Corona Renderer, and that's what the Road Map is for. But there are some things we ask you to keep in mind while reading the Road Map:

The items listed are ones we hope and plan to work on.

However, due to the nature of software development on something as sophisticated and complex as a mature render engine, there is no guarantee or promise that these will make it into the final release. Our plans may have to change at any time, even very close to release - on rare occasions, even after something has made it in to a daily build. A deal-breaker can show up unexpectedly at any time, so please do not pin your hopes and expectations on anything listed here!

All that we can promise is that we will keep the Road Map updated with the latest information from this development cycle: if something changes and we believe a feature won't make it in to the next version, we'll update the Road Map as soon as we know that. Also, if it turns out something can be added this development cycle, we'll add it onto the Road Map as soon as we know.

Most features have Checklists. You can get an idea of how likely something is to make it into the final release by opening up that particular feature and viewing the Checklist. The more items that are marked as complete, the further development has reached without hitting any deal breakers. Of course, that doesn't mean one can't appear even at the last minute, but that does get less likely as development progresses.

If you would like to know more about how we decide what to work on next, and why it is that plans can change unexpectedly, we'll be publishing a blog post sometime soon that will take you behind the scenes (we'll update this card with a link as soon as it is live.
"

We stand by that - we believe in sharing and being open with the community, and we accept that sometimes this will lead to disappointment when something gets delayed, removed, or proves impossible after all. So we won't remove the roadmap, but neither will it ever be a "contract", "promise", "guarantee" or anything similar.


2021-06-08, 20:32:41
Reply #58

dj_buckley

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 479
    • View Profile
Hi Tom

I think the general frustration (although I speak for myself) with items being moved on the roadmap is the wait between releases (i actually think it's quite short - every 6 months'ish), but we're mostly not developers, we're users, so checklists don't really have timeframes to us as we don't appreciate how long these things take.  If it's been shelved because it's going to take a month beyond your planned release date to complete, then i'd rather the V7 release be delayed for a month, than wait a further 5 months to see it in V8.  The dailies simply aren't practical for a lot of us using Corona in production, I personally don't have budgets (both time and financial) to run the risks of using dailies in a live production environment.  So we have no option but to wait for the final stable releases.

Things have been moved plenty of times, as already mentioned the clipper, I think the reaction is different this time, because it's a big feature, it's literally the number 2 most wanted feature after GPU/Hybrid rendering, and there have been major lengthy discussions about it on the forums.  Not only that, but the fact half of the checklist items have been ticked off, makes us, as users, believe it's 'happening'.  Which it is, just not when we thought it was.  And the worst part, was this news was broken to us by another user, not one of the Corona Team.  Your last statement was "we believe in sharing and being open with the community" - but you weren't.  It was a community member who shared/highlighted it.  I appreciate the roadmap is tentative, and things get moved etc etc, but when you can see something being ticked off, you have no reason to believe it won't be in the release.  Had you emailed every paying customer, before taking it off the roadmap, with a note to say, "unfortunately ... bla bla bla" i honestly don't think you'd have got this reaction.

I'd rather each release have one big new feature, and the rest of the dev time spent on fixing previous big features that still don't work perfectly i.e. adaptive light solver, displacement, caustics

Take caustics for example, first introduced in V4, it's still painful to use and no plans for improvements until V8, 4 releases (over 2, nearly 3 years), that's a long time - which is probably where the 'supposedly' slow development comments come from.

Things like Material Library Content updates, and faster colour pickers, and new UI's etc are all nice to have's but not essential, and the take development time away from the essential stuff imo

I have no idea how these things work etc, but the takeover by Chaos, was met with a mixed reaction at the time, but I think people settled at the idea of, hopefully it means access to more resource, more cash injection so more/faster/better development, they even said it themselves in the Q/A about the merger, yet it currently doesn't feel that way, almost the opposite, and that takeover/merger was 4 years ago.

As Bluebox has said, although a few people disagree, but he's right on many levels.  This isn't personal at all.  Archviz is a small industry and it's easy to get 'friendly' with others, but at the end of the day, if you strip back the friendly nature of the industry (fanboyism as some might call it) you're a business and we're trying to run businesses on your product that we pay for, so we have every right to be frustrated/disappointed on a basic level.  Just as customers would in any other industry.  Plenty of analogies have already been used, but they all apply.  In the world of todays 'subscription model' you rely on roadmaps for decision making as a business.

2021-06-08, 21:51:19
Reply #59

TomG

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 4037
    • View Profile
Problem is, we don't know how long it will take to fix, so we can't simply delay 7 unfortunately. See, it looks like "it won't take long it's just this that needs fixing!" - but that's where we've been for the last 6 weeks or more, where we keep thinking it's right on the edge of being fixed and next week it will be in a daily.... and that hasn't worked out. This is also why it stayed on the roadmap for so long too, as it always looked like we were right on the edge of getting it working. Development goes like that sometimes :(

As for the announcement, well I had planned to do one, but then someone spotted it on the roadmap (and the devs were just staying true to their word to update the roadmap asap), and now here we are. Michal has already explained early on in the conversation what happened. We might still do a video at some point, just to show that tone mapping IS working to some extent, and to show that it IS crashing - all depends on whether there is time, as we focus on getting the rest of Corona 7 ready, and all the stuff that goes into announcing that. We shall see!

And as noted, we do totally get that people are frustrated, annoyed, angry, or upset, and we're not saying they are wrong to be, or not entitled to be. To be honest, we are most of those things too (for what comfort that may be to you). Definitely something we wanted to do, thought we could do, were excited to do - and horribly disappointing to have to sit down and make a hard decision this late in development.

The roadmap does say not to use it as decision making for whether to subscribe as it says these things may not happen - like any product, if you buy or subscribe to it today, do so for what it gives you today. Not all the analogies were correct, because you vote for a politician based on what they will do in the future - but you should buy products based on what they do already, right now. What might come in the future is not something to bank upon, and we've tried to make that as clear as we can in the roadmap, from it's name ("Tentative") to the whole "read this!" part too.

Long and short of it is that we are sorry we've not been able to deliver it as we planned, and we do understand the upset in that regard.

Thanks!