MR forum, can it get any worse.

[bricklyne]

Jeff,

 

I seriously think you need to put Maximus3D's views into sharp perspective. His questioning your integrity even after you clearly pointed out the ground rules for accepting to publish such a review on this site - which would completely exclude a purely NL-bashfest-, ought to be a clear indicator as to the objectivity of his opinion.

 

Firstly, the fact that Maxwell, could potentially receive a likely negative review on an ArchVIZ website isn't, and really shouldn't be anything but a logical conclusion from the events of its development with regards to how it specifically affects this particular community of CGers. They have consistently ignored pertinent issues regarding the software's limitations in rendering architectural renders (specifcally Sunlight through glass and clipmaps; apparently clipmaps are fixed for the upcoming version, but no word yet on Sun/glass) and requests by archviz users to have these issues to some minimal degree addressed, have been met with a range of responses from the Mods and Beta-testers, ranging from the plain dismissive to outright insulting and in some cases even straight-up banning. So how can any profesional archvizer, in good conscience be expected to write a glowing review recommending Maxwell, when it's developers seem to have all but ignored the most critical aspect of their renderer's major failing in performing in our particular field, or the fact that the developers didn't seem too overly bothered to fix it despite the fact that this is probably the one community of professionals they are heavily marketing to and have even relied on for free promotion in their image gallery? Maximus3D knows all this too well to make such ludicrous comments.

 

Secondly, if ever there was anybody detached enough, yet still adequately informed as to be an objective reviewer, I would have imagined that that would have been you. Through all this you have managed to keep a professional distance and detachment from all the major mudslinging, but have nonetheless kept abreast of matters as much as one affected by this software would be. That being said, even I don't know for sure, what your primary inclination would be (as in positive or negative) were you to actually write the review, so how Maximus can proclaim to know that yours will be a negative review just based on your association with this site and it's members is a little more than a mystery and just slightly less than considerably ridiculous. And even with all this being said, I still imagine that when it comes down to it you still will not chose to write such a review yourself, just based on your level of professionalism that everyone who frequents this site is well aware of.

 

Basically and IMHO, it all boils down to someone expecting a review reflective of the kind of plastic camaraderie, that NL have force-fed the users at their forum through their Orwellian policies and juvenile mods, and seeing that a degree of objectivity might actually seep into this potential review thus revealing the other side of the coin, he's decidd to piss all over it in a pre-emptive effort, insulting anyone (or more specifically the integrity of anyone along with that of this site in general) who might chose to be involved in such an effort.

 

Like I said, put it in perspective, and dismiss it with the all the contempt it deserves. There's nothing to flame here......

[Ernest Burden III]

Btw, new announcement coming today too keep your eyes open..

 

I can't. Tom banned, me, remember?

[Devin Johnston]

This is what Max was talking about, Juan posted this on the Spanish side of the forum toady.

 

"Hello! You pardon the delay in the answer. you can be imagined how we are these days. This week we will make an announcement daily, already you have seen those of Monday and Tuesday, but the best thing is about to to arrive. You are kind because today fat one comes one still more and your questions will be responded Greetings!" Juan

[AdamT]

Hm, I thought NL already gave us the fat one.

[AdamT]

OTOH, their site is down again so maybe they're putting up something new. Who but NL would have to take down their whole site in order to update a page?

[Devin Johnston]

I think there experiencing high traffic right now because they've posted 3 new videos and everyone is trying to download them. It’s taking about 3 or 4 minutes for me to even make a post.

[_PopArt]

TYou are kind because today fat one comes

 

that sounds scary to me.

 

By now its clear that the major feature is the light mixer whatever thingy. That is why maxwell is now the LIGHT SIMULATOR MASTER or whatever they call it. Everything hinges on this feature, at least all of the marketing.

 

Dont get me wrong, its a very great feature, but i would have prefered having many of the other problems fixed first. Plus we have only seen it used with *really* simple scenes, i dont knwo what will happened to it with complex scenes, because it will have a *huge* ram usage if you want to keep a high dynamic range buffer for every light you put in a scene

[Bongo51]

You guys!

 

Max's comments have nothing to do with integrity.. I have seen him come down on the side of complete reason and understanding in face of sheer stupidity. I agree with him. My wife is a lawyer and I can tell with some assurance that people who have purchased maxwell already are too biased to be a witness. It has nothing to do with intent. Our concious mind represents about 1% of our total 'goings on' upstairs... that's not debatable, so anyone who has experienced anything either postive or negative doesn't make a good objective witness... otherwise do you really think they would disallow a potential jury member simply because they heard about the case on the news? Any first hand experience with the product can taint an interview

 

Now normally, average use isn't a concern. But Max, myself, and anyone who has experienced the nonesense on the maxwell forum may BELIEVE they could be totally objective, but human nature and common legal practice tends to disagree. It's a good idea for the product to be interviewed by someone like Jeff. He may be exposed to our rantings... but he also has seen other positive rantings too. The guy from Toontown (?) who has created so much cool stuff would most likely produce quite a glowing review, unintentionally or intentionally 'forgetting' some of the more dire bits of info.

 

Max isn't a bible thumper regarding anything. Mihai on the other hand.

 

Another idea is to approach this in a journalistic fashion, someone who has some CG experience evaluates it for the first time, then interviews and publishes quotes from several different people. I'm betting that would be a fair way to approach such a touchy situation.

 

hehe

 

But this is semantics.. isn't it? Is there a real review to worry about?

[Ernest Burden III]

By now its clear that the major feature is the light mixer whatever thingy....Dont get me wrong, its a very great feature, but i would have prefered having many of the other problems fixed first.

 

It's an amazing feature. If it works with mortal's computers. Being able to just put in all important lighting and run the scene, then be able to tweek light levels on the final, being able to do many lighting scenarios from ONE render. That could be huge for arch-vis, especially interiors.

[Devin Johnston]

Being able to animate it is also very cool, and the possibility of doing exterior night shots is extremely exciting.

[Bongo51]

Popart,

 

yeah, I actually laughed outloud watching that lightbulb movie.

 

I'm not easily impressed.. but the vue infinite video was impressive... this was.. well, I kept waiting for something impressive to happen... then it was OVER.

 

I've developed a decent amount of software...mind you, not high end code, but I've seen this before. it's the flashy paint to hide the fact the car is made of sponge toffee. Ignore the man behind the curtain. Ooooo look at the cool sliders... mmmmm... wha? does the sun work? Are there clouds, rain and fog as promised? Umm... wooooooo did you see that light change?!

 

[AdamT]

You guys!

Max's comments have nothing to do with integrity.. I have seen him come down on the side of complete reason and understanding in face of sheer stupidity. I agree with him. My wife is a lawyer and I can tell with some assurance that people who have purchased maxwell already are too biased to be a witness. It has nothing to do with intent. Our concious mind represents about 1% of our total 'goings on' upstairs... that's not debatable, so anyone who has experienced anything either postive or negative doesn't make a good objective witness... otherwise do you really think they would disallow a potential jury member simply because they heard about the case on the news? Any first hand experience with the product can taint an interview?

Sorry, but I have to disagree. Rules have to be strict regarding juries because they must encompass every possible person who could be selected. Sadly there are a lot of really dumb and irrational people out there. The legal system also has to make every effort to overcome the inherent bias that attaches to any accused (e.g., "this guy wouldn't be up for child molestation if he hadn't done *something* freaky!").

 

I agree that a smart, rational person might find him or herself in a situation where they simply can't be objective, but it's crazy to say that *no one* can be objective if they have prior experience.

[Devin Johnston]

You know I'm looking at it like this, we can either be pissed off that Maxwell 1.0 isn't what it was promised to be, or we can accept what there going to give us and use it as best we can until V2 comes out. I'm tired of being mad, that doesn’t mean I've forgotten about what NL did, but at this point I just want to use Maxwell to make some nice renderings. We’re finally going to see something usable for real work in a few days so I'm happy about that.

 

Oh on the sunlight through glass issue, one of the guys’s had an idea about how to get around it. Since transparency maps work he suggested using a plastic material with a transparency map to bypass the glass. I don’t know if plastic will allow light to go through it but it may.

[Bongo51]

I was just cruizing the final featurelist... some interesting things.

 

ORTHOGRAPHIC RENDERING

CAMERA AUTOFOCUS

REALTIME OpenGL DOF INDICATOR

 

HDR32 RENDER OUTPUT (HDR, TIFF)

- I always thought it was a waste to produce so much light information, then discard it when you have to save it as .tga or .jpg

 

there are a couple things missing... but if they manage to pull of what is listed here without it being buggy... noisy or slow... I'll feel a lot better about maxwell to be sure.

 

[AdamT]

Oh on the sunlight through glass issue, one of the guys’s had an idea about how to get around it. Since transparency maps work he suggested using a plastic material with a transparency map to bypass the glass. I don’t know if plastic will allow light to go through it but it may.

I saw that too, but I'm sure it won't work. If it did NL would have been all over it by now.

 

Anyway, I agree with you about the bigger picture. I'm looking forward to trying out 1.0.

[Bongo51]

Adam.

 

I was referring directly to those like yourself and myself who have used the alpha, beta and been stunned by the unholy RC1,2,3,4 and even 5. I know, that even though I'm positive about maxwell itself I don't know for sure if I could write a fair assesment of the software being released next week, not from the perspective of a new buyer of V1.

 

I don't think it's a big concession to have a professional like Jeff write it and exclude anyone who has been through such an obviously negative (or in some cases positive) experience.

 

To put the shoe on the other foot... would you really trust a review of maxwell render written by Mihai?

 

Tiz all I'm saying.

 

As to the jury issue... If maxwell were on trial, and I were the defense... I would use my strikes to disallow any witness from the forum, I'd fear they would have an unfair bias towards me client. That's what I was getting at. Anyone actually reading this article deserves a jury full of people without preconceived opinions about the product. (of course this arguing for the sake of arguing... sorry, that's just me being me)

[AJLynn]

Been busy, but want to throw in a couple of points:

 

-Is it really necessary to argue over the details of a review that hasn't been written yet, about a product that hasn't been released yet, not knowing who will write it or when?

 

-I'm tentatively happy with Maxwell (the software, despite disagreements with the people) - the new features, if they're fast enough, for me are enough to replace what's missing.

[Fran]

Do reviews of Autodesk products include their long history of aquiring and scavenging competing companies? There are those who believe Autodesk has acted in a criminal fashion. But I've never seen these issues raised in a serious published review.

 

Do reviews of Final Render include assessments of their performance regarding meeting projected deadlines? What about Vray? Do reviews of Brazil touch on their less-than-friendly forum atmosphere?

 

Reviews of Maxwell should follow the standard of practice in place. If the product is released and tested and confirmed (as specified by Jeff) as not performing as promoted in particular areas, then those shortfalls must be mentioned. The pros and cons of a software is what matters to people reading a review. The readers must draw their own conclusions about the company if they read things like "such-and-such feature is confirmed as not working properly" and "a company representative was unavailable for comment."

[AdamT]

I agree, Fran, except to the extent that NL *may* comment, and if it's something to the effect of, "yes, that will be a free update available soon." In that case I do think a few sentences are in order noting that such statements from NL are to be taken with a whole salt lick, let alone a grain of salt. Otherwise the casual observer may be left with the false impression that NL will actually do as they say.

[_PopArt]

Another thing to consider:

 

Zuliban, one of the best cg artists around IMO, has just recently said this about Next Limit (I think some of the images he did with maxwell were some of the best renders i have ever seen) on the vray forum:

 

"got sick of maxwell hey zuli" - from a vray poster

 

"yes got sick of it those guys just say lies they even booted me from beta team whitout even saying a word ." - Zuliban

 

[Adehus]

"yes got sick of it those guys just say lies they even booted me from beta team whitout even saying a word ." - Zuliban

 

Wow. He always seemed like such a gentle guy... he must have taken some serious crap to feel the need to speak up like that.

 

Aren't he and Andronikos partners? Andro was so active on NL forums, but has been conspicuously absent for quite some time. Looks like the archviz types are fleeing... I bet MWR will render ya up one hell of a nice death star, though. Yee ha.

[leoA4D]

Do reviews of Autodesk products include their long history of aquiring and scavenging competing companies? There are those who believe Autodesk has acted in a criminal fashion. But I've never seen these issues raised in a serious published review.

Do reviews of Final Render include assessments of their performance regarding meeting projected deadlines? What about Vray? Do reviews of Brazil touch on their less-than-friendly forum atmosphere?

 

I am in serious need of help here. Did NL advertise, in different 2005 marketing versions that M~R would include certain features in v1 when some won't be in the 26 April '06 v1? Wasn't M~R suppose to hit the streets on a certain date and it didn't and for months NL advertized that delivery was imminent and one and all should plunk down their money to take advantage of the pre-order price before it was too late when NL knew delivery was still months away? Didn't people call this fraudulent advertizing? Did NL take peoples pre-order money and spend it? Weren't there a bunch of people upset with the RC 1-4 that one or more RCs did not work at all and claiming that the testers were using one engine and something else was given to us? Wasn't there a promise of a 10X speed increase last November and then a month or two later, we are told the time barrier had been broken – by using nine cpus? Wasn't there one or more render core switches – RS1 and RS2 – that were never fully explained? Wasn't there an issue about NL not allowing refunds and then it was learned that a group of resellers were given refunds?

 

If this list is equal to Autodesk, Vray and Brazil's conduct, I guess NL's behavior has to be considered acceptable business methods and nothing need be said about these occurences in any review of v1. And, if NL did not do these things, then I need get on my knees and plead to be reinstated to posting on the forum. It looks like I need to go buy knee protectors that carpet installers use. Need to practice, "Please Mike, take me back?"

[Bongo51]

leo...

 

hehe... no, your list sounds about right... but it isn't complete, there is MORE!

 

so... I don't think the kneepads are required... and it's not just you who has sworn off that forum and thinks Next Limit is morally questionable (being polite).

 

ian

[Jeff Mottle]

Small correction to the stats I posted the other day. I had a filter on that slightly changed the results. Not as dramatic, but still the same result.

 

All Respondants 3rd party rendering usage

 

Scanline: 25%

 

V-Ray: 48%

Maxwell: 11%

FinalRender 9%

Brazil R/S:8%

 

 

Respondants 3rd party rendering usage who use 3dsmax

 

Scanline: 14%

 

V-Ray: 64%

Maxwell: 10%

Brazil R/S: 11%

Final Render: 11%

[AdamT]

I suspect the results are somewhat skewed in favor of Maxwell because of Cinema 4D users, who until fairly recently had *no* third party alternative but Maxwell. Well, there are others who were/are in the same boat, e.g., Rhino users, Sketchup users, and others.