Author Topic: Corona & Team render  (Read 2507 times)

2019-01-07, 12:23:35

3dkobi

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 103
    • View Profile
I'm in the proccess of moving from vray to corona, and was wandering about team render & corona - I saw on the roadmap that corona V4 will have "team render stability improvments" - does that mean that it has issues now ?

Peace,
Kobi

2019-01-07, 12:39:00
Reply #1

houska

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 1410
  • Cestmir Houska
    • View Profile
Hi Kobi,

as far as we as the developers are aware, the Team Render should be pretty stable as of now. There are still two big issues that we are currently aware of and that is inability to use a disconnected client again once it disconnects and a memory issue when you keep rendering for longer periods of time.

We'll tackle those issues as one of our first tasks after the release, so stay tuned for updates!

2019-01-07, 12:41:41
Reply #2

3dkobi

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 103
    • View Profile
Thanks for your super-fast replay :)

2019-01-07, 12:45:08
Reply #3

houska

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 1410
  • Cestmir Houska
    • View Profile
You are welcome! Thanks for asking. One more thing that came to my mind - some people also complained about the speed of Team Render vs. local rendering, but our tests showed us that it's just a matter of setting the parameters correctly, so it might not really be such an issue. That's not to say we won't investigate this too if it turns out to be a more serious problem than we originally thought.

2019-01-07, 13:19:08
Reply #4

lllab

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
congratulations to the corona team to the first commercial c4d release!
it looks pretty nice.

once thing that came to me fast after testing corona, i very much hope you will add also "real" DR like in corona max(via a corona standalone). are there plans for it i hope?

teamrender is a quite unreliable/unliked solution for c4d and also for 3rd party engines problematic in our eyes, at least as sole solution. many c4d users dislike it therefore (see cgtalk p.e). it has many issues from c4d/maxon side yet, which of course also occur on corona in our tests.
on big files with high print resolution, it is terribly slow p.e, in special compared to like vray dr via standalone (on same scene tested)

hope you will add things to have it same as corona max, and be more feature compatible with the max version:)

thanks and cheers
Stefan
« Last Edit: 2019-01-07, 16:18:44 by lllab »

2019-01-07, 18:07:16
Reply #5

BigAl3D

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 229
    • View Profile
You are welcome! Thanks for asking. One more thing that came to my mind - some people also complained about the speed of Team Render vs. local rendering, but our tests showed us that it's just a matter of setting the parameters correctly, so it might not really be such an issue. That's not to say we won't investigate this too if it turns out to be a more serious problem than we originally thought.

I would love to learn about these parameters to ensure Team Render is running most efficiently. Right now, we're running into some major slowdowns. Please enlighten us.

2019-01-07, 18:16:22
Reply #6

sirio76

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 48
    • View Profile
I agree with Stefan, a real native DR system will be a lot better than C4d Team Render. Also customers using Prime version do not have TR clients at all and in order to use distributed rendering the way it is now they will be forced to buy pricier C4d versions.

2019-01-07, 22:00:05
Reply #7

ofengestalter

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
    • 3D Ofengestalter
@houska : What parameters do you mean?

peer to peer seems faster than sending assets directly to the client. But how can I tune it more.

2019-01-08, 06:30:19
Reply #8

3dkobi

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 103
    • View Profile
I agree with Stefan, a real native DR system will be a lot better than C4d Team Render. Also customers using Prime version do not have TR clients at all and in order to use distributed rendering the way it is now they will be forced to buy pricier C4d versions.
My 2 cents:
I'm working with vray DR for 2 years now and it's also a big pain - you have to put all your bitmaps inside vray adv shader, and if a texture is missing c4d texture manager dosen't show it so you have to manually search for each path. Also when using DR you can't use shaders other than those of Corona...
I prefer to pay a little more to maxon for TR nodes (actually I just did upgrade from prime to broadcast) and having a smooth workflow

2019-01-08, 09:15:51
Reply #9

rozky

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 17
    • View Profile
Congratulations to commercial c4d release!
I prefer integrateted corona DR with support for native c4d shaders :)
I think that DR is one of key feature of renderer. Prices of corona for 3dsmax and c4d are the same so I expect that corona team will add DR in the future.
First year discount I understand as compensation for missing features that will be added in next year.
Thank you
Peter

2019-01-08, 14:25:22
Reply #10

lllab

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
"I prefer to pay a little more to maxon for TR nodes (actually I just did upgrade from prime to broadcast) and having a smooth workflow "

>> but TR is not smooth at all, here at least, and i see for many others. it fails very often and is pain as slow most time.

the corona team, having all in one hand for sure can make c4d bitmaps etc working direct for a corona DR.

also it would be great to have ALL corona shaders that exist in max, also on c4d, the c4d shaders are very very limited sadly

my2 cent at least
Stefan
« Last Edit: 2019-01-08, 14:55:11 by lllab »

2019-01-08, 22:13:22
Reply #11

andeltoz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Quote Stefan and Sirio76. I have always felt good with the Vray DR. It works perfectly and has never given me problems. I do not even find a problem using the Vray Adv Bitmap, it's just a matter of habit. I have a Prime and I don't find correct to speak of a small amount of 650 euros (without MSA) to go from a Prime to a Broadcast. I think that a Corona DR would make many users happy that like me have a Prime and others.
« Last Edit: 2019-01-08, 22:29:53 by andeltoz »

2019-01-09, 09:17:01
Reply #12

fabio81

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 301
    • View Profile
I agree too. I do not see a big future without a DR system like in 3dsmax. Team render seems almost forgotten by most users. I hope that in the future it will be planned.

2019-01-09, 09:34:38
Reply #13

mascab

  • Users
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Me too.
I'm switching from vray to corona in these days and I found team render far less efficient that vray DR.
I think that a native DR inside Corona is a must.

2019-01-09, 10:39:13
Reply #14

houska

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 1410
  • Cestmir Houska
    • View Profile
I would love to learn about these parameters to ensure Team Render is running most efficiently. Right now, we're running into some major slowdowns. Please enlighten us.

From our office tests, it shows that you should aim for lower update interval and higher packet size to prevent network congestion and transport errors. You can find these parameters in the "Team Render tab of the Corona Render Settings.

2019-01-09, 10:46:42
Reply #15

hughannes

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 30
    • View Profile
I'm sorry but I strongly disagree.
I agree that Teamrender isn't implemented perfectly yet, but I'd very much prefer Teamrender over something like a VRay DR equivalent.
One thing I love about Corona is how it tries to tightly integrate into its host app. I realize that there need to be workarounds where Cinema just doesn't have a particular feature but Teamrender is hardly a "missing feature", in my opinion.
« Last Edit: 2019-01-09, 10:58:19 by hughannes »

2019-01-09, 10:54:08
Reply #16

lllab

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
"Teamrender over something like a VRay DR equivalent. "

it really shoudl have both.
we do big archviz and design projects and teamrender is unusable for that and very bad workflow, in my opinion. TR is a severe bottleneck.
it cant be used for proper speed related workflows where you need to see a progressive result immediate, and often it hangs at all, among many other TR typical issues(a lot of things need to be extra backed or chached to render ok on several TR machines), which a DR system not has.

if both ways exist, users can choose them.
some like you are happy with TR, but others not at all.

i mean a real DR like also corona on max has, with also all corona shaders that exist on max corona.
« Last Edit: 2019-01-09, 11:00:04 by lllab »

2019-01-09, 10:57:56
Reply #17

hughannes

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 30
    • View Profile
teamrender is unusable for that and very bad workflow

Can you elaborate?

2019-01-09, 11:08:16
Reply #18

lllab

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
you not see the image, only after long time small stripes on bottom, via a real Dr you see after seconds the full image. on teamrender you wait hours on big images until you see all.
on comparence to a real DR system it is quite slower also in total, i assume the TR system has more overhead, in the way maxon designed it.(being separate renders just stiched together in PV)

certain particle and motionblur things, randomisation tools/shaders, etc or other dynamic effects not work via TR without extra caching or baking. this is as c4d in effects splits the render in parts, using copies of the c4d file, not the original data on each node, and then composes this parts together in the PV. this kills many features, same as it does in c4d internal renderers.

TR also often decides to stop or never finish, on an 8 or 10k image this is very bad finding our after hours it wont finish ok. (see cg talk for the many errors users have with TR, in any renderer, this is not corona specific, so they also cant do much about it)
a real dr system, like corona render normally has natively, can add nodes while rendering and also release nodes without affecting the final result. you always get a good render.

a standalone system seems to use a lot less ram here and rendering faster than the renderer inside c4d. here we see almost the double ram with c4d than on a pure standalone.

we also miss corona features(in shaders p.e or volume features) that max corona has, to make corona only with thew limited c4d shaders, and not offering both we feel is a shortcoming, and artificial limitation, that hopefully will get overcome in future updates.
« Last Edit: 2019-01-09, 11:20:00 by lllab »

2019-01-09, 11:44:20
Reply #19

mutilo

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 168
    • View Profile
Me too.
I'm switching from vray to corona in these days and I found team render far less efficient that vray DR.
I think that a native DR inside Corona is a must.

I agree too. I do not see a big future without a DR system like in 3dsmax. Team render seems almost forgotten by most users. I hope that in the future it will be planned.

Quote Stefan and Sirio76. I have always felt good with the Vray DR. It works perfectly and has never given me problems. I do not even find a problem using the Vray Adv Bitmap, it's just a matter of habit. I have a Prime and I don't find correct to speak of a small amount of 650 euros (without MSA) to go from a Prime to a Broadcast. I think that a Corona DR would make many users happy that like me have a Prime and others.

I agree with Stefan, a real native DR system will be a lot better than C4d Team Render. Also customers using Prime version do not have TR clients at all and in order to use distributed rendering the way it is now they will be forced to buy pricier C4d versions.

extraordinary good guys.
But I think having a native DR system can be a really important thing.

2019-01-09, 17:43:10
Reply #20

hughannes

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 30
    • View Profile
thank you for that illab.
i disagree with some parts - but i don't want to start a tr argument here.

i guess what i really wanted to say is just this:
with vrayforc4ds dr system many c4d features had to be substituted. i would very much regret that.

2019-01-10, 11:37:47
Reply #21

lllab

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
actually most did work with vray dr, and a lot more things that not work on TR.
only the internal c4d shaders cant run on v-ray standalone, which i for example not are fond to use anyway as most are inferior to my use.

anyway we obviously seem not to need the same things for the work, which isnt a problem i guess.
i also not asked to replace TR but to add DR as options, for pro users. so i guess no worries, i am sure tr will stay:)

2019-01-10, 15:05:51
Reply #22

ilgioma

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 25
    • View Profile
I agree with the other users too ...
if you have a "Prime" version of C4D go to Corona is not cheap ....

Leo

2019-03-22, 15:44:41
Reply #23

vianney

  • Users
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Actualy i compute large pictures (4000x2000) on 2 separated computers
because i dont want to buy a second corona licence, i tried team render but the rendering takes more time that rendering on a single PC.
Is there a way to setup a file package witch may be rendered on another PC ?
Is there another way to proceed ?

2019-03-22, 15:48:07
Reply #24

houska

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 1410
  • Cestmir Houska
    • View Profile
Hi vianney,

we are currently fixing the Team Render. Have you tried the Daily build, which has a better version of the TR support?

To enable it in the Daily build, you have to enable Render Settings -> Corona -> Team Render -> Communication -> Arbitrated (experimental). It might also be a good idea to change the packet size to a value that will work best on your network. We are currently working on auto-detection of this value.
« Last Edit: 2019-03-22, 15:51:59 by houska »

2019-03-23, 06:59:16
Reply #25

Barendby

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 84
    • View Profile
we are currently fixing the Team Render. Have you tried the Daily build, which has a better version of the TR support?

To enable it in the Daily build, you have to enable Render Settings -> Corona -> Team Render -> Communication -> Arbitrated (experimental). It might also be a good idea to change the packet size to a value that will work best on your network. We are currently working on auto-detection of this value.

This Arbitrated more does not render for me at all, I just have a black render window. Am I suppose to set something on the slaves too?

2019-03-28, 12:49:38
Reply #26

Beatmonk

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Hi guys,
since switching from beta to Version 3 (HF1), I have some strange errors with team render. I rendered some animations some month ago with c4d files converted from Vray and it worked fine and beautiful. Now with version 3 and the new Vray 3.7 (one mac workstation and 4 Win7 clients), these C4D Corona files won't render in TR because of missing VrayBridge (?) plugin. This Vray plugin folder exists on my workstation but not on the clients because here we use Vray in "standalone" mode.
Has someone an idea how to solve this?

2019-04-09, 10:22:37
Reply #27

yushi76

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 9
    • View Profile
what's up with denoising in team render. Got Problems with this. It doesn't work well. Is it fixed yet?

2019-04-09, 11:15:03
Reply #28

yushi76

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 9
    • View Profile
Update.... denoising is also turned off if i render it via render manager without TeamRender.
In my setup it's on and Noise Limit of 2,5. I rendered it now with interactive rendering and i hat to put it in the tool manually on.... ?!?!