Author Topic: Hall of shame: nVidia  (Read 11873 times)

2014-07-27, 06:08:33
Reply #15

Javadevil

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 399
    • View Profile
OMG... i really don't understand how those users can consider this artifacts a brute force method...

<a href="http://www.loogix.com" title="visit www.loogix.com">visit www.loogix.com[/url]
visit www.loogix.com<a/>

Thats nuts that they cannot see that as interpolation !! There high on Crack :)

2014-07-28, 20:12:32
Reply #16

JeffPatton

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 80
    • View Profile
    • jeffpatton.net
Ludvík at times you can come across rather harsh in forum discussions (IMHO).  However, I personally don't think anything about it because: a. I know you're passionate about the render engines and making sure things work as we all would want and/or expect them to.  b.  Know what you're talking about.  c. Forum posts can't show the proper emotion behind the text...no matter how many smiley emoticons are used.

I'm rather disappointed to see the nVidia folks handle the discussion like that.  I think the appropriate route would have been to simply counter your argument with indisputable facts that prove it wrong (show the math if you will)...if they can't do that then admit you're right and move on.
Workstation: AMD Threadripper 3970x with 128gb RAM and 2x Titan RTX GPUs (win10 pro)

2014-07-28, 21:45:50
Reply #17

Ludvik Koutny

  • VIP
  • Active Users
  • ***
  • Posts: 2557
  • Just another user
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Ludvík at times you can come across rather harsh in forum discussions (IMHO).  However, I personally don't think anything about it because: a. I know you're passionate about the render engines and making sure things work as we all would want and/or expect them to.  b.  Know what you're talking about.  c. Forum posts can't show the proper emotion behind the text...no matter how many smiley emoticons are used.

I'm rather disappointed to see the nVidia folks handle the discussion like that.  I think the appropriate route would have been to simply counter your argument with indisputable facts that prove it wrong (show the math if you will)...if they can't do that then admit you're right and move on.

Yup... 

i usually (at least) try to not be harsh from the start, but i easily lose it when they start to tell me all those old fairy tales all over again. They are again going in the wrong direction (like with importons, BSDF, irradiance particles and very weird placebo multiple importance sampling implementation, all of which are or soon will be discontinued), yet when they are confronted with reality, they plug their ears and go LALALALALA as loud as they can.

Even though i am now mostly involved with Corona, i would still like Mental Ray to get back up it's legs, because there are still many things i like about it. Unfortunately, with this kind of attitude, there's less and less hope each year that will ever happen.

I still remember the area light fiasco, which made you leave Mental Ray for good. And no one even cared such a valued professional like yourself switched renderer, even though fixing that would probably be about a day of work for single person.

It was just way too much of a bait for me not to get caught on, when i saw statements like these in that thread:

- "In my tests on the scene I show about, other current path tracers can take up to 14 times the render time of the new GI on the CPU. Nearly 28 times the time of the GI on the GPU."

- "The GPU massively outperforms my CPU. The new GI GPU just seems incredible fast"
« Last Edit: 2014-07-28, 21:49:57 by Rawalanche »

2014-07-29, 12:05:58
Reply #18

pokoy

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 1883
    • View Profile
I still remember the area light fiasco, which made you leave Mental Ray for good. And no one even cared such a valued professional like yourself switched renderer, even though fixing that would probably be about a day of work for single person.

Funny that you mention this one, because the general notion seemed to be something like 'who needs that, what we have is good enough', even though the request for a fix has showed up year after year with each release. It showed that there's a huge gap between devs and users in what's considered as 'must-have', 'good enough' and 'not sufficient'. I guess devs need to take user requests seriously even if they seem far-fetched, even if it's just to give the user base the feeling of being heard.