Return-Path: Received: from host6.canaca.com ([66.49.160.142] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP-TLS id 4736136 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 04:12:40 +0200 Received: from static24-89-101-87.r.rev.accesscomm.ca ([24.89.101.87] helo=[192.168.1.5]) by host6.canaca.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Sc5m7-0005FZ-3X for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Tue, 05 Jun 2012 22:15:07 -0400 Subject: Re: [AE] Why a raytraced renderer? References: From: Jack Tunnicliffe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (9B206) In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <97EEA56B-F41D-456F-AA24-837F8BB61582@javapost.ca> Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 20:12:07 -0600 To: After Effects Mail List Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - host6.canaca.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - media-motion.tv X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - javapost.ca X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: I agree, Steve, and for a few hundred bucks I have AE ray tracing, real time= Davinci Resolve (corrections and rendering) Genarts Sapphire and Monsters a= re all faster with Cuda. I don't think I can live without this injection of s= peed. I used to do work on my laptop but now I rarely do, missing my Cuda ca= rd at the office. Jack Tunnicliffe www.javapost.ca www.caffeineproductions.ca Sent from my Apple iPhone On 2012-06-05, at 7:47 PM, Steve Oakley wrote: > lets put it another way, the cost of a CUDA compatible GPU is a couple hun= dred bucks. thats way cheaper than replacing an entire system sporting xeon C= PU's that could easily run $3k-5K. a CUDA GPU is literally 1/10th the price o= f a CPU upgrade.. assuming you even need to do one.=20 >=20 > S >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Jun 5, 2012, at 4:20 PM, Todd Kopriva wrote: >=20 >>> I'm trying to get my head around Adobe's decision to go with the ray >>> traced renderer they did in AE6.=20 >>=20 >> I just asked a couple of the software engineers involved about this decis= ion, and they say that a ray-traced renderer is more efficient for getting g= ood-looking results for reflections, refractions, and shadows than would be a= scanline renderer. Our GPU-based ray-traced 3D renderer is actually quite f= ast compared with anything that gives comparable visual results for these li= ght-related characteristics. That said, the CPU-based renderer is slow, and w= e acknowledge that.=20 >>=20 >> As far hardware dependencies: We officially support a couple dozen GPUs, a= nd many of the high-performing ones (like the GTX 580) are not expensive. >>=20 >> +---End of message---+ >> To unsubscribe send any message to >=20 >=20 > +---End of message---+ > To unsubscribe send any message to