Return-Path: Received: from exprod6og109.obsmtp.com ([64.18.1.23] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP-TLS id 5028202 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Sat, 06 Apr 2013 01:00:53 +0200 Received: from outbound-smtp-2.corp.adobe.com ([193.104.215.16]) by exprod6ob109.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUV9ZdIZApcAzIRyeV3MGf8RGUOFIk4HN@postini.com; Fri, 05 Apr 2013 16:08:39 PDT Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (inner-relay-1.adobe.com [153.32.1.51]) by outbound-smtp-2.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id r35N8Z99003504 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 16:08:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nacas03.corp.adobe.com (nacas03.corp.adobe.com [10.8.189.121]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id r35N8YAV002966 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 16:08:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nambx09.corp.adobe.com ([10.8.189.47]) by nacas03.corp.adobe.com ([10.8.189.121]) with mapi; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 16:08:34 -0700 From: Todd Kopriva To: After Effects Mail List Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 16:08:33 -0700 Subject: RE: [AE] After Effects Technology Preview Thread-Topic: [AE] After Effects Technology Preview Thread-Index: Ac4yThfM8CQ6iDpBTtGQ+vAE6eI+2QAA9XIQ Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_B006868B2420FA4F88AB29E127AA783D3994CF6878nambx09corpad_" MIME-Version: 1.0 --_000_B006868B2420FA4F88AB29E127AA783D3994CF6878nambx09corpad_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The RAM question is a good one. I'll check with the folks working on that f= eature to see what they say. Yes, the caching does work for layers backed by .c4d files. It's comparing apples and oranges a bit, but... Yes, Cinema 4D rendering is= faster than the ray-tracer for the cases where it would make sense to comp= are them. We'll be getting into some details about when each workflow is ap= propriate, but one point is that the ray-traced 3D renderer in After Effect= s is still the best way to get certain results that depend on refractions a= nd reflections. From: After Effects Mail List [mailto:AE-List@media-motion.tv] On Behalf Of= Rich Young Sent: Friday, 05 April 2013 15:37 To: After Effects Mail List Subject: Re: [AE] After Effects Technology Preview So the situation where is like Dynamic Link where you need the RAM to suppo= rt another application running in the background. What is a realistic minimum amount of RAM? Does Cineware use AE's caching system like a normal layer? Is it much faster than the CUDA raytracer? --_000_B006868B2420FA4F88AB29E127AA783D3994CF6878nambx09corpad_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The RAM q= uestion is a good one. I’ll check with the folks working on that feat= ure to see what they say.

=  

Yes, the caching do= es work for layers backed by .c4d files.

 

It&#= 8217;s comparing apples and oranges a bit, but… Yes, Cinema 4D render= ing is faster than the ray-tracer for the cases where it would make sense t= o compare them. We’ll be getting into some details about when each wo= rkflow is appropriate, but one point is that the ray-traced 3D renderer in = After Effects is still the best way to get certain results that depend on r= efractions and reflections.

 

 =

From: After Effects Mail= List [mailto:AE-List@media-motion.tv] On Behalf Of Rich Young
Sent: Friday, 05 April 2013 15:37
To: After Effects Mail Lis= t
Subject: Re: [AE] After Effects Technology Preview

 

So the situat= ion where is like Dynamic Link where you need the RAM to support another ap= plication running in the background.

What is a realistic minimum am= ount of RAM?
Does Cineware use AE's caching system like a normal layer?=
Is it much faster than the CUDA raytracer?

 =

= --_000_B006868B2420FA4F88AB29E127AA783D3994CF6878nambx09corpad_--