Autodesk suffer from their own size
Exactly like Microsoft

But Octane is small, and not made by a huge team, kinda like MoI
That's why its reacting so fast and listening to the users requests

Its the best scenario for softwares I think :)

I guess for me it's a charactor thing.

Cant change the name of "Beta". The software is being charged for. This is not Beta. (Back to the charactor thing)

I dont really want to be bashing though (unless you want to continue) This would be a topic for another forum.

Hi Burr,

There is a public beta version that is free that anywone can download and try, it is updated along developpement as well.
Octane allows renders which used to take many hours in minutes.

There is a private beta program costing half the "release" price, this one enables to save your projects.

This problem is rather specific to nurbs exports and generally doesn't hinder polygon model rendering.

Marc

Hi Marc,
My bad....I wasnt aware of the free one....Thanks for setting me straight.

Burr

Yes, basically it's a buy now before the price increase.

I invested in a license (as I do with a lot of software that I feel may become very good over time) in the hopes that it will be a great renderer for MoI and to also have in my toolkit something similar to all the grab an HDR, throw in your model and render a beauty shot kind of rendering apps that are on the market now.

Personally, I've always felt Michael is blessed as a software engineer who can release pretty much BUG FREE software without breaking a sweat; his betas are typically always production ready!

It's not fair to hold other programmers to that standard. ;-)

-Will

To be really fair, Michael should rename beta by point release. :P

Yes, but having the beta with new functionality, at the end you CANNOT return to the previous version!
Try to do some of your work now without the styles.....
And you upgrade, with pleasure.

>>>>>Personally, I've always felt Michael is blessed as a software engineer who can release pretty much BUG FREE software without breaking a sweat; his betas are typically always production ready!>>>>>

It's actually a respect thing. Michael works for YEARS on something before it is released. Respect for himself...AND me. He could have released MoI along time ago (for the money). V2 has been in beta and development for 2 YEARS! I suppose he could have released IT about, oh, say 2 YEARS AGO because he wanted another pile of money. (by the way, Michael, when you release V6, can I borrow 50 bucks? :O) But in the last 2 years there have been significant changes.

Michaels method is customer related. I have chosen to be a customer, and will upgrade at every release and continue to use it. In the meantime, I am ONLY using the beta. Dont even have V1 loaded anymore. I am confident I wont be shafted at some point and have to go back to V1! (where does this confidence come from?)

The other method will ALWAYS have you in bug ridden software, or on the OLD V1 version from a couple years ago. I have experienced this many times with softwares. It's a sure fire way to loose me as a customer because that is my only recourse.

I am not saying OCTANE is not good or promissing for you or any of that. Only a "pattern" that I personally recognize as poor and avoid. It's just an opinion.

I'm glad that some will have a good solution for this type of render for themselves.

Hi Burr, there are also some other practical aspects to it as well...

For example having a really high stability actually helps a lot to reduce tech support burden.

And having really stable beta releases helps a lot to get more people to use the beta, which has a lot of benefits - it helps bring out some remaining bugs to the surface and also getting people to use stuff earlier makes it more possible for me to gather feedback on the design too and make refinements.

So in a sense the big focus on stability actually helps me to be more efficient in many ways as well as being helpful for actual use as well.


But of course you have to start somewhere! It's harder to get stability in the earlier stages of a product before it has had a lot of exposure and use.

For most projects that 4-year incubation period is just not feasible because it is really hard to keep a business going for 4 years without making any income at all... That's a heavy expectation load to place on a startup, really.

- Michael

"Michaels method is customer related. I have chosen to be a customer, and will upgrade at every release and continue to use it. In the meantime, I am ONLY using the beta. Dont even have V1 loaded anymore. I am confident I wont be shafted at some point and have to go back to V1! (where does this confidence come from?)"

I first started messing around with computers in about 1979 with a Commodore PET and I've used quite a bit of software in between then and now. I agree with BurrMan that Michael is one of a select group of developers who focus on supporting customers and providing them with what they want and need (another that springs to mind is Tom Davis, the author of the Zoot 6 PIM). As a result MoI seems to have many enthusiastic and loyal users. It's a virtuous spiral and long may it continue...

Dan

>>>>>For most projects that 4-year incubation period is just not feasible because it is really hard to keep a business going for 4 years without making any income at all... That's a heavy expectation load to place on a startup, really.>>>>

You did it! The truth in this are the benefits you pointed out. In a "larger view" (Visionary) Your method will be FAR more cost effective, efficient, better product, Customer satifaction...etc, etc. The "other" company will be overbloated with a poor product and pay a heavy price in the end.

It really is careful thought and planning and takes a person with "Heart and Character" to think in this manner and plan this way. The "Hard Road" is not that at all. By far, in the end, the self respect will be exponentially more valuable.

I'll jump on that train every day of the week.

Hi Burr,

> You did it!

Yup, but I just barely squeaked by in many aspects.

I mean don't get me wrong I definitely agree that there are many long range benefits to my approach, that's why I do it! :)

But if you told every startup that they had to invest 4 years first without making any money, there would be a lot fewer that would even attempt it. That's a really harsh thing to _require_ before you would consider for any startup to be doing a good job.

Actually if I myself knew that it would have taken that long to get MoI v1 out the door, there is a good chance that I might not have attempted it either! My original plan when first starting up was to try and spend something more like one or one and a half years to get out v1.

- Michael

I hear you Michael.

>>>>Actually if I myself knew that it would have taken that long to get MoI v1 out the door, there is a good chance that I might not have attempted it either! My original plan when first starting up was to try and spend something more like one or one and a half years to get out v1.>>>>

But your Character couldnt sell me something "less than what YOU expected"!

Thank you. Thanks to Mrs. Gibson for sticking with you through what was probably some tough decisions. Your little guy thanks you too :o

ALWAYS take the high road. If you cant adhere to this, then perhaps you shouldnt be selling software?

Thanks for squeeking....Lube is on the way!

I'm sorry, BurrMan, that you feel that people who are paying 1/2 price for a full version 1.0 license before it's released is somehow "evil" or "wrong". I've pre-ordered many software games before they were released and waited with NOTHING until the box hit the store shelves and I received my copy. Many beta's are free, yes. I frankly would have jumped all over the chance to get MOI for $100 while it was in Beta after I tried it. I would have had no problem with that. I saw the vision of the software and when the licenses were available I jumped on it. If I could have gotten it for 1/2 the price a couple of months before...that would have been great!

People can download Octane and try it out. If they like it, they can participate on the beta program. The funds raised have allowed us to get the hardware necessary to support Windows, Linux and Mac OSX along with multi-GPU support. It has also allowed us to expand with more programmers to finish the project and track down bugs faster than previously.

There are other GPU rendering engines that don't even support MOI nor are attempting to. They didn't and don't have a demo. You could not get a full version 1 license prior to full release. Would you prefer we were like that?

We are trying to keep the price low and in reach of the hobbyist as well as supporting the small studio. We are actively trying to make it so MOI3D is supported properly in Octane.

I'm also sorry if you think that Octane is super buggy. There is no doubt that Michael has done a fantastic job in the way that MOI3D has been developed and rolled out. Unfortunately, writing software to run on a GPU is pretty complicated. There is a reason why you don't see every little renderer on the block on the GPU. It's all new territory and I am proud to work on the project.

MOI3D and Octane have been two pieces of software that have revolutionized how I work, and for that I am thankful for both programmers for their vision and dedication to these tools.

Phil Beauchamp
Refractive Software

>>>>There are other GPU rendering engines that don't even support MOI nor are attempting to. They didn't and don't have a demo. You could not get a full version 1 license prior to full release. Would you prefer we were like that?>>>>>

Sorry, dont know of any program that I cannot render my MoI models with. MoI is superb at getting my models to any Program!

>>>>I'm sorry, BurrMan, that you feel that people who are paying 1/2 price for a full version 1.0 license before it's released is somehow "evil" or "wrong". I'm also sorry if you think that Octane is super buggy.>>>>>>>>>>>>

Never said Octane is "Super Buggy". Certainly never called "evil". I probably made a mistake to get into this in the "octane thread". I kindof did a sidestep and a dis-service to you and your company.

For me, the prevalence of people "releasing" software for "MY GOOD MONEY" for the purpose of funding their venture is a two fold slap in the face. I was also corrected by Marc that their is a "free version" for people like me to evaluate to decide wether I want to jump on board. I was not aware of this and I acknowledged my mistake here.

For you, you justify this approach. Though, I believe it to be "wrong" and your system will always be either "behind" or being used to support yourself in development and removing bugs and such. I'm sorry you dont see this. It just means for me, It will be another app I wont use.

(1)Your response is a justification from "YOUR POINT OF VIEW". (2) I wonder if Octane will ever implement a plan for me to use their software for free, until I make money with it, then I will pay them!

1 is common place. The second will never happen. Though, The approach I was harping on (Michaels,) should be the NORM!

Sorry I sortof highjacked your thread, though it was a branch that stemmed from the original topic. But, The gist of my posts are more of a generalized practices comment than a bash on Octane.

The appearance of an Octane bash is my bad. I should start a "Burr's personal beef" thread. Sorry Phil.

"We are trying to keep the price low and in reach of the hobbyist as well as supporting the small studio. We are actively trying to make it so MOI3D is supported properly in Oct"

I tried Octane myself and because it was still clearly some way from being completed and because I found it complex for a beginner like myself I bought Keyshot instead. However, I certainly wouldn't have an issue with paying for a beta version of Octane that turns into a license and I think the low price point of Octane is great. I decided on Keyshot because I don't have time to learn how to use Octane right now BUT (just like MoI) the Octane price is low enough that I could afford to buy an Octane license in future and experiment. In fact, that's probably what I'll do.

All in all, Octane seems to me to be a likely win for all people interested in using GPUs in 3D modelling. The combination of MoI and Octane in particular looks like a potent one at a very reasonable price point.

Regards
Dan

Hello,

I plan to purchase Octane Render shortly (as soon as distribution begins getting stock on GTX 285's), I demoed the product and found it to be capable for my needs. I also purchased Thea Render recently and have been happy with that, although the interface could use some work. Frankly I like the direction OR is headed, and I find it refreshing that there are developers out there that don't price their products into the stratosphere.

The MoI way of running things is distinctly different that the norm. Having dealt with countless software companies over the years I can say that MoI has to be in the top three for best customer experience. I think the fact that individuals from Refractive are showing up here asking questions should be some sort of indication that they want to make their product right, on a public forum no less.

While it is obvious Mr. Gibson does not need to assist Refractive it is great to see his willingness to do so. As OR solidifies, it will be interesting to see how the two applications interoperate.

Well I'd just like to clarify for myself that I have no negative feelings or statements about Octane or its developers.

My vote was cast when I purchased a license. I felt it was a good investment and I'm patiently waiting for it to bear fruit.

My only hope is that Radiance sends out emails when the next beta is release because I don't normally follow that forum on a daily basis :-P

I'm glad to see Michael attempting to help out with getting MoI models to render cleanly in Octane - it's a win-win for all involved in the long run.

I'm going to look at CORE's rendering of MoI objects as well and look for similar artifacts.

I'll point Newtek to Michael's instructions on typically what's wrong and how to read the OBJ files because with my plans to let go my Cinema 4D XL and Softimage, I'll be depending or CORE / Lightwave exclusively to handle MoI objects just as good as Cinema 4D does now in the near future!

I just have to decide if I want to keep C4D with all the lovely plug-ins or sell it off...

-Will

Burrmann, you state: "ALWAYS take the high road. If you cant adhere to this, then perhaps you shouldn't be selling software?"

Do you really believe that every start up is less ethical because they do not have Micheal's resources and/or have a different plan that allows for someone to try it out for functionality, support the development stage (think of it as a donation) or wait (arguably prudent) and purchase it at full price once it is fully proven?

I met Philbo a couple of years ago due to his active involvement (donating time & resources) with Blender. Since then I have had a chance to share a couple of meals and conversations with him. I have also observed him in extraordinarily tough circumstances as well. While I'm unable to take advantage of Octane due to hardware issues there is no subterfuge in what the Octane team is doing... they have different needs & plans which requires customers.

Respectfully,
David Warner

I also have respect for Philbo and apologized for what I did to his thread that wasnt intended for my partucualr input.

Please dont continue with it.