>tfw using mari,houdini, and nukeis there a greater feel?
>>654385Yes, add renderman!
>>654393>rendermanas much as i want to i use an AMD gpu so i'm stuck with pro render
>>654395It's not a GPU renderer! it's damn fast for a cpu renderer. Do it anon. Although I don't think you can get renderman 21 for Houdini anymore so you will have to rib and ris your stuff and render through the command line.
>>654395Oh I mean to ask how do you like your amd gpu? I was thinking of getting a radeon pro but I am worried about how well it plays in Linux with Mari.
>>654397it's alright. it runs a bit hot though so your mileage may vary. for the most part i can't complain but i feel like an nvidia card would be a better choice simply due to real time raytracing and optix denoising in conjunction with each other would lead to some nice stuff. that being said i hear amd is doing something similar, so i dunno. prorender as it stands has a really nice uber shader in maya. i can't complain at all about it. it's kinda like a super advanced version of the principled pbr shader that eevee uses in blender if you're informed about that, just it's a pathtracer so it's super refined on realism without TOO much tweaking. i just wish i could use it on houdini. hardware wise i can't complain though. the card runs fine. i'll try out renderman too btw
>>654397Don't get an AMD card if you want to do 3D. That's just a shitty decision.
>>654408gotta back that up with some facts. AMD has the best openCL performance. But no CUDA performance. It's a trade off. They also have the cheapest HBM2 cards which have crazy bandwidth. The only thing that really sucks about AMD cards is you are locked out of the CUDA renderers, Octane, Redshift etc.
>>654413giving the fact that Octane will soon be available for free for Blender and Arnold GPU might be a thing soonish, being locked out of the best Render engines is a bad decision. Then there is Renderman with its CPU+GPU mode also coming in the near future. I don't know which of these will only run on CUDA, but i wouldn't risk it.
>>654385Yes>Raw, unadulterated shader programmingeven better:>Making your own electrical components and building your computer which runs your own OS and engine that is essentially a mega engine which can do most kind of styles and can morph it's design from OOP to Component to functional when neededI wish...
>>654432have you tried C++? i think it's pretty multi paradigm-ish.
>>654385>is there a greater feel?Yes, using Blender
>>654471Blender can't do what Mari, Houdini and Nuke does. So you feel greater, but you can't keep up with the big boys.
>>654385>mariYou do know Substance exists, right?
>>654493not the same. Not even close. Substance is good in it's own right but Mari stands apart.
>>654493> substanceanon stop baiting with your PBR shit
>>654498>>654499I use both. I bake in Substance Painter, then i export useful smart masks, create tile-able materials in Designer, then throw it all into Mari and build from there.
>>654503hmm. i would always figure people bake their stuff in zbrush or whatever they're modelling in, then take those maps into mari to color or w/e, then take it into maya/houdini/whatever to make their shader network on top of the maps. so you could have an AO map you made in mari then give it its own shader network, same with spec/gloss, fresnel, clear coat, subsurface, and so on. didn't think about tiling materials before.
>>654468Yeah, I do C++ and C#, but I'm talking about changing entire workflows. It would fit into a dropdown and the engine changes. That's ideal though, the work would be too much in reality, for me at least.
>>654503absolutely nothing wrong with that workflow. I do it myself when it makes sense too. This is an area Mari will get stronger in. Competition is good!https://youtu.be/rMPigJxGB6E?t=2002
>>654506not that guy but I tried to write my own engine for the past 3-4 years in C++. There are so few tutorials out there on how to do basic shit like use a debugger like nsight, and when you do use nsight it crashes all the time. And then you end up with huge holes in your engine cause people wont share information and you have to go onto forums like gamedev.net and beg for help and you get shit advice by people already with their own engines and then those people there start arguing.It really is a clusterfuck. For example me I couldnt understand how to get models to animate with skeletal bones despite posting and reading numerous threads over there so I just have assimp which is shitty and takes forever to load a model because you cant save to a binary. So my engine is pretty much just cubes and overall its horribly optimized. I feel like shit for wasting the past 3-4 years tbqh. People dont want to share their secret recipes at this point in time for the good stuff that you actually need to write a decent, modern engine
>>654385>is there a greater feel?Yes. Being able to afford them.
>>654523>I couldnt understand how to get models to animate with skeletal bonesAren't those hierarchical transform entities that interpolate using time? You also would have to implement skinning to associate vertices with the bones. And as for importing models, you could implement your own loader, if you have the time. assimp seems to be using magic tokens and file extensions to identify what format it is.
>>654561>Aren't those hierarchical transform entities that interpolate using time?of coursebut its not that simple, i just kept getting shit results day after day then posted for help on gamedev and they couldnt help me either. The only (((working, compilable))) example I can find actually uses assimp which again has the limitations. I just kept going around in circle, feeling more and more retarded
>>654570I see. That hits home. But again, if you have the time, you could study assimp and make your own loader based off your new knowledge, you wouldn't have to ask anyone about anything at that point.