Return-Path: Received: from mail-vc0-f169.google.com ([209.85.220.169] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP-TLS id 4737396 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Thu, 07 Jun 2012 02:51:59 +0200 Received: by vcbfl10 with SMTP id fl10so33275vcb.28 for ; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 17:54:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=oGI1LXa/juNMohZ1/0FSoBLfZQXXnMSSp8MALGkVp0U=; b=WdpVFmJ4SMLW3K7gu/5SY153u/BwGFDNusAmt4PaMlgMwqcgYc8dv85lTBdddxDle9 6v4VLjhE1Oz5UXs/ZFYUOFT1MDcVU/d6pDzD0nbg7+6VNvewXCA5aVVB6If5COTgh8hZ I6iRYu3zllcV6x2IdANovV7zjQ6Qh1+8oq+CACDwwutRcKtPf1w9a61I4Xg6Kt0JcY/W LihPRF/pyuAqM8ly90Y/Ik7Tq1nZ6eUu87XhMqKujTJ2UibnLBtSdNwJNPXuNzBwlrdf lZEkV1BXapRdiTxvdopmQJfOUtaVA+BL+MU525bIST2vUEsDkI+ydcCjLYXa0yYbZC8i Ie9w== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.22.50 with SMTP id a18mr177301vdf.60.1339030467692; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 17:54:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.149.70 with HTTP; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 17:54:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 20:54:27 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [AE] Why a raytraced renderer? From: rendernyc To: After Effects Mail List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec5015e775ec6bc04c1d753d2 --bcaec5015e775ec6bc04c1d753d2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 huh, do you main after effects 5.0? (sans the CS) btw, a $300 GTX card is faster than a $1000 Q4000 for the raytracer i bet a lot of these sub $1000 PC laptops with 525M cards are probably close to a q4000 On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Rich Young wrote: > CS5 is when AE got 3D features. It took 11 years to get extruded text > (except for the cycles that shipped Invigorator), which was apparently > designed for those comfortable buying a $1000 GPU for their tower computer. > > Personally I'm OK with Nvidia acceleration, though my card is much slower > in AE. I expect most already caught this article: > > http://prolost.com/blog/2012/6/4/fast-ray-tracers.html > > > > --- On *Wed, 6/6/12, Daniel Ramirez * wrote: > > I'm not seeing how CS5 is relevant to the conversation. > > The visit(s) I'm referring to were conducted Dec 2010 - Jan 2011. > > In any case, I don't have a time machine and if I did, I'd be watching the > sun be born or maybe do something dinosaur related. > > On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Rich Young > > wrote: > > Too bad Adobe can't get on the same page as a company for 3D features. CS5 > was a long time ago. > > The customers we visited that were interested in doing simple text and > shapes in 3D were comfortable buying a $1000 GPU for their tower computer > in order to use the feature. It's possible we visited the wrong people,... > > > -- danny princz exposedideas.com --bcaec5015e775ec6bc04c1d753d2 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable huh, do you main after effects 5.0? (sans the CS)

btw, a= $300 GTX card is faster than a $1000 Q4000 for the raytracer
i bet a lot of these sub $1000 PC laptops with 525M cards are p= robably close to a q4000

On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Rich Young <= span dir=3D"ltr"><aefilter@yahoo.com> wrote:
CS5 is when AE got 3D features. It took 1= 1 years to get extruded text (except for the cycles that shipped Invigorato= r), which was apparently designed for those comfortable buying a $1000 GPU = for their tower computer.

Personally I'm OK with Nvidia acceleration, though my card is much = slower in AE. I expect most already caught this article:

h= ttp://prolost.com/blog/2012/6/4/fast-ray-tracers.html



--- On= Wed, 6/6/12, Daniel Ramirez <ramirezdan@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm not seeing how CS5 is=A0relevant=A0to the conversation.
The visit(s) I'm referring to were conducted Dec 2010 - Ja= n 2011.

In any case, I don't have a time machine and if I did, I'd be watching the sun be born or maybe do= something dinosaur related.

On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Rich Young <<= a rel=3D"nofollow" href=3D"http://mc/compose?to=3Daefilter@yahoo.com" targe= t=3D"_blank">aefilter@yahoo.com> wrote:
Too bad Adobe can't get on the same p= age as a company for 3D features. CS5 was a long time ago.

The customers we visited that were interested in doing simple text and= shapes in 3D were comfortable buying a $1000 GPU for their tower computer = in order to use the feature. It's possible we visited the wrong people,= ...




--
danny princz

exposedideas.com
--bcaec5015e775ec6bc04c1d753d2--