Chaos Corona for 3ds Max > [Max] Feature Requests

The most wanted feature?

<< < (213/228) > >>


--- Quote from: BardhylM on 2022-10-29, 14:28:44 ---Can developers explain at least is it possible to "convert" Corona into a GPU render engine, as there are so many Hybrid requests.
Do not get me wrong Hybrid enthusiasts, but I think that would mean rewriting the base code completely, meaning it would not have the qualities of the CPU Corona.
Taking example on Vray, it has been developing the GPU version for so long, and as far as I know it doesn't have quite some features of the CPU version. Meaning the current scenes would need to be converted and adapted for the GPU options, in which we would start complaining about some features that are not implemented like in some other engine (hint: it starts with F).
If that means crippling the current process of Corona in improving features or adding new ones, would that be feasible? Something that would get half results in both fronts, leaving no one satisfied.

I may be wrong completely, that is why a explanation would help in this matter as I am sure the team researched this possibility if they put it in the list of wanted features.


--- End quote ---

I think you've hit the nail on the head here, perfectly.

I know I've read from the developers themselves, many times in this forum, exactly your explanation for not making a move in GPU. Which I think is 100% fair and reasonable. No need to take steps backward!

Out of interest; what features do you think the aforementioned 'F' renderer is missing? :)


--- Quote ---Out of interest; what features do you think the aforementioned 'F' renderer is missing? :)

--- End quote ---
I haven't used it, but from what I've seen it is pretty good and can not say what is missing. I used it as an example for what we usually do in this forum, and what I saw in their group.
Do not like when the community turns salty and criticize other engines, like in the last time when Corona pattern was added they went mad that this is copying their blessed engine.
The next post is "Where CoronaSky, faster!!!" :)

I would think improving some features, trying to make a little faster IR and fixing some early following bugs is my suggestion/vote in this matter.
And also if it is possible to make an exclude option for Denoiser would be fancy in some materials.

Sorry to mods for wandering off the topic a little in these posts!

Feasibility of Corona going GPU was explained more than once already. You people just don’t listen.

Corona was made for those “less technical” users, yet devs decided to let those users be quite involved in the direction of development. That leads to unrealistic expectations from the community. not far from kids being allowed to drive.

I heard so many dissatisfied voices here over last three or so years. Not constructive critique but simple whining. Very much undeserved. Be grateful for being allowed to be involved and be mindful of most likely quite limited experience with software development.

Regarding hybrid rendering - who tried it? and of those who did - who claims that this limited use case feature is the next important step for Corona?

James Vella:
I agree that Vray GPU is missing quite a few features which is a bit of a let down. However in theory if Hybrid rendering was introduced such as how Redshift/Cycles has done it what's wrong with that? The way I imagine it would be if you have a GPU that you can enable to speed up rendering you click the button, if not use the CPU or both. That sounds great to me as long as all current features work. This also means you get to keep your render farm in case they don't have powerful GPUs for overnight stuff. That scenario sounds like a win/win to me.


--- Quote from: piotrus3333 on 2022-10-30, 10:20:17 ---
Regarding hybrid rendering - who tried it? and of those who did - who claims that this limited use case feature is the next important step for Corona?

--- End quote ---

I would say that in terms of scalability, GPU/hybrid rendering is absolutely the future of rendering. And those that dont embrace it in some capacity are at risk of being left behind.

I agree that theres reasons why corona isnt made or suited for GPU and its not happening any time soon in any major way. But utilising GPU power is without a doubt an important step for the whole industry.

Whilst it was made to require less technical knowledge, it was also supposed to not get in the way or be an obstruction to quality which it does beautifully. You shouldnt have to be a technician to be able to do accurate and efficient light transport calculations when you have a team of developers that really know what they're doingt.

There has definitely been some ridiculous entitlement on the forum in recent years leading to heated debates. I think engaging with the community is something the dev team has done really very well though and is part of the reason why i still champion the software to anyone thatll listen. Its made my job easier every single day for the past 8 years and being able to utilise coprocessing would be a great help for freelancers like myself who dont have render farms in-house but have a decent GPU thats sitting idle most of the time. Even passing specific things like volumetrics or caustics to the GPU would allow us to improve render quality without the time penalty. Though its obviously easier said than done.


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version