|
By Eric C (RL) - 5 Years Ago
|
|
Dear iCloners,
The iClone Unreal Live Link plug-in was initially designed for large studios to streamline production by removing monotonous import/export procedures and focusing on content iteration.
By connecting iClone’s character pipeline with Unreal Engine’s cinematic tools, Reallusion provided a much more efficient process that significantly accelerated workflows everywhere. After a 6-month trial run and lots of great user feedback, Reallusion now wishes to further empower the entire 3D community by making the premium Unreal Live Link plug-in FREE to all indie users!
So if you are a freelance artist, a solo developer, or just love making awesome stuff… then now you have free access to this powerful connection tool, while taking advantage of Reallusion’s indie packages to create like a pro studio.
• Your annual gross revenue from design work must be less than USD 100,000 / year • Only one license per user /organization • iClone Indie includes a supplementary license for use on a second computer/laptop, users may also work on dual boot mode • Schools and educational institutions are excluded from this Indie License program.
" TO OUR LOYAL ICLONE USERS –
We thank all of you for always supporting our tools and vision; you are the reason why we strive to continuously upgrade iClone to make it the best tool for the 3D community. Your feedback has helped us make the iClone Unreal Live Link plugin free for all indies. This time we have a great opportunity to bring our iClone community closer to Unreal, and you are our best ambassadors thanks to your years of experience. We invite everyone to kindly welcome the new Unreal Engine users that will be visiting your Reallusion forums to learn about iClone. Likewise we welcome anyone to jump into the Unreal Marketplace and forums to help users that are curious about the iClone Ecosystem. "
If you have already purchased this plugin prior to our announcement, then please contact us for your reimbursement with Reallusion DA points.
Many thanks,
|
|
By wires - 5 Years Ago
|
Dear Eric C,
It would appear that RL are forgetting the long-time loyal iClone users who have no interest in Game development, but still use the software for the original intended purpose - Filmmaking. We have no desire to learn yet another software just to get better renders out of iClone, an improved native render engine would suit our requirements very nicely.
|
|
By Kalle3 - 5 Years Ago
|
|
Dear Eric C,
It would appear that RL are forgetting the long-time loyal iClone users who have no interest in Game development, but still use the software for the original intended purpose - Filmmaking. We have no desire to learn yet another software just to get better renders out of iClone, an improved native render engine would suit our requirements very nicely.
Hi Gerry
das ist vollkommen richtig!!!
Kalle from Germany
|
|
By rogyru - 5 Years Ago
|
Great news thanks RL cant wait to try this out . Iclone has great CC & animation tools and is great for small sets. But when it comes to larger environments it has limitations that Unreal fills perfectly. Unreal is a cinematic tool as well as a game development tool and is used in many visual productions these days.
|
|
By sonic7 - 5 Years Ago
|
Thank-You!
I can (and do) understand the view that Gerry and others have regarding this. For *film-makers* who wish to only work within iClone, - "other" softwares may be of little interest. But I do think this is kind gesture by Reallusion. They didn't have to offer this *FREE* option, and so for that I must say "Thank-you". Will I use it? I would 'prefer' to do everything in the iClone universe (mainly intellectual limitations - lol), but who knows? --- Maybe one day I might get an understanding that will make it possible even for me. For those 'switched on' enough to embrace this alternative render pathway - today's your lucky day!
|
|
By ccCreator - 5 Years Ago
|
|
wires (1/17/2020)
Dear Eric C,
It would appear that RL are forgetting the long-time loyal iClone users who have no interest in Game development, but still use the software for the original intended purpose - Filmmaking. We have no desire to learn yet another software just to get better renders out of iClone, an improved native render engine would suit our requirements very nicely.
Hi Gerry, I'm sorry but your criticism is not valid. iClone 7 added many rendering features plus the iRay plugin. I don't feel RL is forgetting about it's long-time loyal users at all. Additionally you may not be aware, but both Unreal and Unity are far more than engines for making games. In the past few years both have invested heavily in making there engines powerful filmmaking too. Unreal specifically developed Unreal Studio, then rolled all those features into Unreal Engine. The Mandalorian is actually made using Unreal, so it's definitely not just for games. I understand that you may not want to invest the energy into learning other software, but no one piece of software does everything, nor should it. Right now any 3D filmmaker worth his salt should know Photoshop, Premiere/FCP/HitFilm, Blender, Marvelous Designer, Substance Painter/Designer, zBrush, After Effects, Audition OR programs that are their equivalent. At the end of the day, Character Creator and iClone are good at what they do best, but there should never be a day that it's the only software you use. Not if you want the best quality. When it come to realtime render engines, you need to learn either Unreal or Unity if you want results that are at that level. Personally I'm a Unity user, but with this new development I can choose to gripe or I can download Unreal for free and add another powerful tool to my skill set.
Disney uses Epic's Unreal Engine to render The Mandalorian
|
|
By rosuckmedia - 5 Years Ago
|
Hello,
My question is who can get the plugin,
I am registered with Unreal and am still learning,
But I'm not a game developer but try to use it as a rendering platform,
so don't earn money with it. I own Iclone7 and the 3DXChange Pipline Version and Pipline Character Creator Version.
I am eligible for this free Iclone Live Link Plugin.?
Greetings from Germany.
Greeting rosuckmedia
|
|
By Am7add9 - 5 Years Ago
|
the vets will always pull the "filmmaker" card
ironically none of them make movies
over extended test scenes
|
|
By sonic7 - 5 Years Ago
|
Let us not forget those of 'senior' years who, (for reasons you'll only know about when you "arrive"), find it challenging to assimilate multiple softwares. If you're young and have a switched on mind and can assimilate multiple programs - good for you - go for it. But don't forget not everyone's in the same boat. As far as filmmakers being 'worth' anything - well it's art - it's creative - do it any way YOU can.
|
|
By animagic - 5 Years Ago
|
|
Am7add9 (1/17/2020)
the vets will always pull the "filmmaker" card
ironically none of them make movies
over extended test scenes
That is incorrect if you would bother to check my YouTube channel, for instance, as well as that of others. These are the kinds of unsubstantiated comments that make this forum unpleasant at times.
|
|
By animagic - 5 Years Ago
|
|
A simple question: I assume that in order to use exported stuff in Unreal, export licences are required for DRM-based content? That would be a cost to consider even though the plugin is now free.
|
|
By ccCreator - 5 Years Ago
|
|
sonic7 (1/17/2020)
Let us not forget those of 'senior' years who, (for reasons you'll only know about when you "arrive"), find it challenging to assimilate multiple softwares. If you're young and have a switched on mind and can assimilate multiple programs - good for you - go for it. But don't forget not everyone's in the same boat. As far as filmmakers being 'worth' anything - well it's art - it's creative - do it any way YOU can.
Very true, I'm no spring chicken myself. At the same time I realize that I can't hold back progress for everyone else. I also can acknowledge that in the last year especially, RL has made great leaps when it comes to the render quality of iClone as a standalone product. I'm not just going to blast them because they are expanding their market. Tighter Integration with Unreal Engine will bring valuable new resource for all Reallusion users, and help to establish the software as premiere character creation and animation tools. Not to mention the added revenue from new user helps to fund developing that new native graphics engine many folks desire. It's a win for everyone. And like you said, it's FREE.
|
|
By thairston - 5 Years Ago
|
|
Can we pull landscape into unreal with the unreal Live Link Plugin
|
|
By justaviking - 5 Years Ago
|
|
Interesting news.
The best part, as has been pointed out, is that RL is offering this for free. That's very generous of them, and for someone wanting to combine CC3 and Unreal, it's awesome news.
For me personally, I'm in the "fix the native renderer" camp. I would like to see more effort put into reducing the desire for external rendering and make it easier to get great results all within the RL suite. Recent updates (SSS, hair shader) were a step in the right direction, but there remains a lot of work to do on the native renderer. I wrote a bit more in the pre-announcement thread (link)
|
|
By ccCreator - 5 Years Ago
|
And when I say that RL has not forgotten about the vets who want better renders in iClone, last year they added:
- PBR Rendering
- Global Illumination
- Emissive Materials & Particles as Light Sources
- Lut Grading
- HBAO+
- Real Cameras and lenses
- Digital Human shader with SSS
- Improvements to the lights
- iRay
- etc
All of those things are important components to better native rendering. That's why I feel the criticism that they've forgot about native iClone users is invalid.
|
|
By toystorylab - 5 Years Ago
|
I also hope iClones native render will get improvements (Volumetric lights!) soon.
But it is good news the Unreal Live Link is free now, should have been free from the beginning.
I would feel bad if I had purchased it for 699$ (Early Bird) or 999$ (regular Member Price).
Getting back the money spent in DA points is better than nothing but not ideal.
I don't know how many licences were sold, but RL should allow those buyers
to get whatever they want from Software Store/Content Store/Market Place worth what they spent...
My first impression of Unreal, a few months ago, was "a lot to learn and a heavy impact on my PC - resources".
And seeing "node based" stuff makes me "shaky" :blush:
I didn't open the program since then...
I would like to check it out further now i have this "magic" Link.
How do i get these:
Found no way to get access to those learning videos (only as Bonus with purchase)...
|
|
By james_muia - 5 Years Ago
|
This is great news for those wanting to use Unreal, and thanks Reallusion for making it free!
I am also another filmmaker who wants to make films in IClone, not in Unreal. When I say 'make films' I mean create scenes, and export those rendered scenes into an actual film editor like adobe premiere. IClone really isn't a good 'film editor', even if it has that functionality. I don't think Reallusion should focus on improving 'editing' features anyway, as Adobe Premiere, avid, etc. are designed for editing.
IClone has all the tools necessary to make great rendered scenes, but there is always room to continue to improve the quality of the native renderer. Maybe with this partnership, Reallusion will be able to add the Unreal renderer inside of IClone or have the technology to improve their own native renderer. Who knows.
IClone V7 has improved tremendously adding lots of higher quality materials, effects, and such. It's a big step up from IC5 when I started. As long as Reallusion continues to develop IClone with higher quality visuals and improves the renderer, there's no way we can't have the best of both worlds. Those who want to use Unreal engine for games or films will be able to, and those of us who want to render their scenes in IClone with higher quality will be able to.
|
|
By ccCreator - 5 Years Ago
|
Toystorylab, Those videos are available on the Reallusion youtube. There is a playlist with 26 videos in it. I watched them this morning.
You are right, nodes are intimidating at first sight. But they are easy once you get how they work and EXTREMELY powerful. It seems like all apps are quickly moving to being node based.
|
|
By TonyDPrime - 5 Years Ago
|
You know, not for nothing, but no one is saying that Unreal must be used. It's now an open option to use the LiveLink plugin.
And before this you could always, if you had pipeline, use FBX/OBJ/Alembic to get content into Unreal, so it's not like Unreal just suddenly showed up now and is butting into our domain or territory. It has been there as an option for years..
I mean, it's not like RL has abandoned the user base or anything. They just came out with DH shader, which was for all intensive purposes 'born' from iClone's attempt at making a RL shader for Unreal.
They could have just left this in the Unreal domain and left iClone/CC3 alone, but they didn't. They bought it into the RL-internal app render engine, which was a big improvement for iClone-only users.
But anyway...just take the plugin and use it!
TAKE IT!
USE IT & ABUSE IT!
Oh....and on another note-
The Unreal community is the most pompous stuck up obnoxious community in all of history. Octane Render community is meticulous as hell, but never really obnoxious.
But Unreal community is the worst. They really believe they have the prime best, when there is a TON of room for improvement.
I love the idea of RL users swarming in and ripping their engine's horrid elements to shreds. For example, the timeline and camera system in Unreal is so awful. Absolute horrible compared to iClone.
Now, I know the Unreal engine is a game making engine, which has its own history and culture, and I respect that. But I also understand it does things not as a good as iClone.
I am very pleased with the idea that iClone users would go in there, in mass, and critically compare it to iClone.
Look, don't defend iClone and all its innate values to us, here, as you are preaching to the choir.
Rather, go into the Unreal forums and preach to them!...
Speaketh thine word to those who have not seen.
For they have nor not yet born witnesseth to the majesty and utmost high excellion of the iClonian Engine.
|
|
By Peter (RL) - 5 Years Ago
|
|
toystorylab (1/17/2020)
I would feel bad if I had purchased it for 699$ (Early Bird) or 999$ (regular Member Price).
Getting back the money spent in DA points is better than nothing but not ideal.
I don't know how many licences were sold, but RL should allow those buyers
to get whatever they want from Software Store/Content Store/Market Place worth what they spent
DA Points can be spent in the Reallusion Software Store, Content Store or Marketplace. They are no longer restricted to just the Marketplace.
https://www.reallusion.com/contentstore/buydapoint.html
|
|
By toystorylab - 5 Years Ago
|
|
animagic (17.01.2020)
A simple question: I assume that in order to use exported stuff in Unreal, export licences are required for DRM-based content?
That would be a cost to consider even though the plugin is now free.
Oh, yes, i did not think about that... :pinch:
I spent sooo much money over the years on my iClone Assets, even without any export licence,
and i will never ever start with that route...
|
|
By AutoDidact - 5 Years Ago
|
|
I understand why RL made this strategic decision and I applaud them. My personal advise is to perfect your animation BEFORE sending it to unreal. You really do not want to try and edit an animation within unreal. A 24 minute video.. Yes but HIGHLY "Educational " regarding the unreal workflow. :-)
|
|
By ccCreator - 5 Years Ago
|
TonyDPrime,
I actually agree with you. I'm a Unity user by choice and actually have to explain to clients Unreal Engine is not what HAS to be used to get good results. Some Unreal users are a little pompous and the UI is a little convoluted. And what you mentioned about the camera system and the timeline being worst that iClone is right too. Which is why I'm glad to see that Live Link actually uses the iClone camera system and timeline in Unreal. So that's a win. Still not as good as Cinemachine and Timeline in Unity, but I'll take it over Unreal's tools when it comes to that. I say all that to say, I don't think some iClone users fully appreciate how with the last year developments iClone is getting really close when it comes to rendering. The individual feature are adding up. While some things are missing like true volumetrics lights and such, those are exactly the things that are extremely system heavy and what bogs down lesser systems trying to run Unity and Unreal. If folks have a tough time doing those things in the other programs, any next-gen native renderer that RL eventually comes out with will cause the same bottlenecks.
|
|
By james_muia - 5 Years Ago
|
toystorylab (1/17/2020)
animagic (17.01.2020)
A simple question: I assume that in order to use exported stuff in Unreal, export licences are required for DRM-based content?
That would be a cost to consider even though the plugin is now free.Oh, yes, i did not think about that... :pinch:
I spent sooo much money over the years on my iClone Assets, even without any export licence,
and i will never ever start with that route...
But with livelink, don't the characters just automatically send to Unreal? Where would the export license come into play there? Does IClone give you an error if you try to use Livelink with a non-export licensed character?
Yeah I have tons of IClone content, non-export license stuff. No way I'm spending $$$$$$ buying export licenses for all of that content. That's insane.
|
|
By wires - 5 Years Ago
|
james_muia (1/17/2020)
toystorylab (1/17/2020)
animagic (17.01.2020)
A simple question: I assume that in order to use exported stuff in Unreal, export licences are required for DRM-based content?
That would be a cost to consider even though the plugin is now free.Oh, yes, i did not think about that... :pinch:
I spent sooo much money over the years on my iClone Assets, even without any export licence,
and i will never ever start with that route...
But with livelink, don't the characters just automatically send to Unreal? Where would the export license come into play there? Does IClone give you an error if you try to use Livelink with a non-export licensed character? Yeah I have tons of IClone content, non-export license stuff. No way I'm spending $$$$$$ buying export licenses for all of that content. That's insane.
Ah yes, "Free" has a price. :P:laugh::hehe:
|
|
By duchess110 - 5 Years Ago
|
Something that caught my eye was in the first post of this thread by Eric.
If you have already purchased this plugin prior to our announcement, then please contact us for your reimbursement with Reallusion DA points.
So you do not get a refund of your cash back into your bank you instead get DA points which can prove to be useless if there is nothing you wish to purchase with them.
|
|
By wires - 5 Years Ago
|
ccCreator (1/17/2020)
wires (1/17/2020)
Dear Eric C,
It would appear that RL are forgetting the long-time loyal iClone users who have no interest in Game development, but still use the software for the original intended purpose - Filmmaking. We have no desire to learn yet another software just to get better renders out of iClone, an improved native render engine would suit our requirements very nicely.
Hi Gerry, I'm sorry but your criticism is not valid. iClone 7 added many rendering features plus the iRay plugin. I don't feel RL is forgetting about it's long-time loyal users at all. Additionally you may not be aware, but both Unreal and Unity are far more than engines for making games. In the past few years both have invested heavily in making there engines powerful filmmaking too. Unreal specifically developed Unreal Studio, then rolled all those features into Unreal Engine. The Mandalorian is actually made using Unreal, so it's definitely not just for games. I understand that you may not want to invest the energy into learning other software, but no one piece of software does everything, nor should it. Right now any 3D filmmaker worth his salt should know Photoshop, Premiere/FCP/HitFilm, Blender, Marvelous Designer, Substance Painter/Designer, zBrush, After Effects, Audition OR programs that are their equivalent. At the end of the day, Character Creator and iClone are good at what they do best, but there should never be a day that it's the only software you use. Not if you want the best quality. When it come to realtime render engines, you need to learn either Unreal or Unity if you want results that are at that level. Personally I'm a Unity user, but with this new development I can choose to gripe or I can download Unreal for free and add another powerful tool to my skill set. Disney uses Epic's Unreal Engine to render The Mandalorian
Regarding using other software to complete a film. I own and use Avid Media Composer, DaVinci Resolve and Fusion, Substance Designer and Painter, 3DCoat, Blender, various tools from Boris and New Blue, iZotope and Steinberg for audio and a few more ( I am happy to state that I have no need or requirement to even touch anything from Adobe). From the above list I consider myself expert in the use of Media Composer, advanced in Resolve and passable in most of the others. All of that took years to get to where I am today, and is IMHO more than enough to complete the work that I have to do.
Fortunately no one has ever asked me to do anything with a Game, and I doubt that any of my customers even know that Unreal does not refer to something from a Zombie film. I don't need another render engine outside iClone, the present one has made quite a few improvements but still has a list of shortcomings already posted my others in many threads on the Forum.
I'm really quite happy for all of the Game makers who have now been presented with this wonderful, for them, opportunity and hope that RL will now be able to devote more resources to the iClone render engine. :cool::smooooth:
|
|
By wires - 5 Years Ago
|
|
duchess110 (1/17/2020)
Something that caught my eye was in the first post of this thread by Eric.
If you have already purchased this plugin prior to our announcement, then please contact us for your reimbursement with Reallusion DA points.
So you do not get a refund of your cash back into your bank you instead get DA points which can prove to be useless if there is nothing you wish to purchase with them.
Peter said DA Points in this post.
|
|
By ccCreator - 5 Years Ago
|
|
Regarding using other software to complete a film. I own and use Avid Media Composer, DaVinci Resolve and Fusion, Substance Designer and Painter, 3DCoat, Blender, various tools from Boris and New Blue, iZotope and Steinberg for audio and a few more ( I am happy to state that I have no need or requirement to even touch anything from Adobe). From the above list I consider myself expert in the use of Media Composer, advanced in Resolve and passable in most of the others. All of that took years to get to where I am today, and is IMHO more than enough to complete the work that I have to do.
Fortunately no one has ever asked me to do anything with a Game, and I doubt that any of my customers even know that Unreal does not refer to something from a Zombie film. I don't need another render engine outside iClone, the present one has made quite a few improvements but still has a list of shortcomings already posted my others in many threads on the Forum.
I'm really quite happy for all of the Game makers who have now been presented with this wonderful, for them, opportunity and hope that RL will now be able to devote more resources to the iClone render engine. :cool::smooooth:
That's actually my point, we all use multiple tools to do what we do. Operating with the understanding that Unreal and Unity are just GAME engines is flawed. They quit being just game engines 3-4 years ago. Now they are realtime render engines. They are being used in TV and Film by people who never make games. And when it comes to realtime render engines, they are 2 of the best and most versatile. Personally, I have never made a game, but I use Unity everyday.
|
|
By alikubur35 - 5 Years Ago
|
|
As a indie developer and involving a small budget project, i am very happy to become free for indies.
Thanks of billions, Reallusion team!
|
|
By TonyDPrime - 5 Years Ago
|
@ccCreator - thanks for your feedback, I appreciate your posts as well.
You know what is a big deal too with this, which is a plus for iClone-only users, is something that user Jarretttowe brought up in the 'Upcoming Announcement' post. What he mentioned is that RL has found a way, by opening the doors of the UE4 ecosystem to iClone users, to open the doors of the RL ecosystem to UE4 users. Because, even if you are a straight up game maker using UE4, you may want a cinematic tool for intros, cut-scenes, and outros. Likewise, you may want a tool for creating characters...well, TA DA! You now have CC3 and iClone, with all of these abilities...and now, a FREE plugin to LiveLink to Unreal.
So, what this means is that RL has effectively created a dev-cycle improvement for EVERY SINGLE game developer using Unreal....
Although, 1 problem, iClone and CC3 are not FREE....but still, for some relatively inexpensive investment, quite a time saving return potentially.
Every single UE4 user making a game has now greater access to iClone's mo-cap timeline tools to be quickly transferred back into the game engine they already use and know so well.
Which means, that we may get swarmed with more and more and more UE4 users asking for improvements in iClone's own engine...
eh?
EH?
See, now there will be even MORE incentive and pressure for RL to better the RL-engines because it will entice UE4 users into the RL ecosystem, content-store and all....
In theory, you may even see soem producvers straight up abandon Unreal, if RL's own production studio, being iClone, is made stronger...
So, for any iClone-only user, there is something very promising about all of this movement, here.
Development flourishes when new ideas and complaints come in and breathe new life to the ecosystem.
This is the way.
|
|
By ccCreator - 5 Years Ago
|
|
@TonyDPrime - I completely agree. It's a big picture move and a win for everyone. Epic/Unreal just added a valuable tool to it's suite. And now it makes more sense for devs to explore iClone and Character Creator, instead of Maya, Make Human, Fuse, etc. (Although Maya has a Live Link option too, but they don't have an integrated Character Creator equivalent.) I think people are overlooking the big picture and too stuck in the thinking that Unreal is just for games. Unreal and Unity are the future of professional virtual filmmaking, and Reallusion just firmly inserted themselves right in the middle of the pipeline.
|
|
By illusionLAB - 5 Years Ago
|
|
See, now there will be even MORE incentive and pressure for RL to better the RL-engines because it will entice UE4 users into the RL ecosystem
I agree there'll be more traffic from UE4 users, good and bad, but totally disagree with the idea that this will prompt RL to improve the native renderer. This actually takes the pressure off RL to improve the render engine as they have offered a "free" path to a far superior and continually improving real time renderer. I predict the initial traffic from UE4 newbies to the forum will be asking for things that we have been asking for for years - the iClone ecosystem is a strange beast at the best of times.
|
|
By GOETZIWOOD STUDIOS - 5 Years Ago
|
|
ccCreator (1/17/2020)
../.. Operating with the understanding that Unreal and Unity are just GAME engines is flawed. They quit being just game engines 3-4 years ago. Now they are realtime render engines../..
That's what you don't get. We don't need realtime renderer, we need a fast "enough" native renderer (from realtime to a few seconds per frame). Unreal and Unity, being realtime renderer, will never implement some advanced features that would cost too much drop in framerate. That's where iClone SHOULD shine today if Reallusion understood that from the beginning. For animating we need at least 30fps (but then we don't need full high quality rendering) and in this area there are still issues that will be hard to solve, because iClone can't rely on a cooking step. But for rendering, we don't need 30fps. Up to a few seconds per frame would be acceptable. Which obviously is not for a "realtime" renderer.
ccCreator (1/17/2020)
../.. They are being used in TV and Film by people who never make games../..
That's irrelevant, Houdini, Motion Builder, etc.. are used in TV and Film that does not mean iCloners should learn and master them all. Using Unreal in TV and Film require much more technical knowledge and resources than one iCloner alone can usually support.
The question is: If you master all the mentioned external applications, why would you need iClone for in the first place ? All these softwares used together can do a much better job than iClone alone.
|
|
By ccCreator - 5 Years Ago
|
|
GOETZIWOOD STUDIOS (1/17/2020)
That's what you don't get. We don't need realtime renderer, we need a fast "enough" native renderer (from realtime to a few seconds per frame). Unreal and Unity, being realtime renderer, will never implement some advanced features that would cost too much drop in framerate. That's where iClone SHOULD shine today if Reallusion understood that from the beginning. For animating we need at least 30fps (but then we don't need full high quality rendering) and in this area there are still issues that will be hard to solve, because iClone can't rely on a cooking step. But for rendering, we don't need 30fps. Up to a few seconds per frame would be acceptable. Which obviously is not for a "realtime" renderer.
Here's one place where you don't have good information. Unity and Unreal have Octane Renderer integration, via OToy, already on the market that produces the highest quality possible. Additionally Live Link uses iClone for animation at 60fps and Unreal for rendering. So what you are saying we need is EXACTLY what the solution provides.
That's irrelevant, Houdini, Motion Builder, etc.. are used in TV and Film that does not mean iCloners should learn and master them all. Using Unreal in TV and Film require much more technical knowledge and resources than one iCloner alone can usually support.
I said nothing about needing to learn MotionBuilder or Houdini. I said that Unreal and Unity are being used to render for TV and Film, at an extremely high quality. iClone would act as MotionBuilder in this equation.
The question is: If you master all the mentioned external applications, why would you need iClone for in the first place ? All these softwares used together can do a much better job than iClone alone.
There is nothing I've seen on the market that better handles character creation as easily as Character Creator and realtime animation as easily as iClone. They are solutions for those two things. While a better native renderer is in the works, Unreal and Unity are EXCELLENT rendering alternative for filmmaking.
|
|
By Rockoloco666 - 5 Years Ago
|
|
ccCreator (1/17/2020)
And when I say that RL has not forgotten about the vets who want better renders in iClone, last year they added:
- PBR Rendering
- Global Illumination
- Emissive Materials & Particles as Light Sources
- Lut Grading
- HBAO+
- Real Cameras and lenses
- Digital Human shader with SSS
- Improvements to the lights
- iRay
- etc
All of those things are important components to better native rendering. That's why I feel the criticism that they've forgot about native iClone users is invalid.
Last year?? You have a strange concept of time, most of the features you mention are from 2 to 3 years ago
|
|
By james_muia - 5 Years Ago
|
|
ccCreator (1/17/2020)
While a better native renderer is in the works, Unreal and Unity are EXCELLENT rendering alternative for filmmaking.
Yeah except now you need to spend tens of thousands for export licenses if you want to use any of your IClone content in Unreal.
I agree that this will help keep Reallusion in the pipeline and a link between Unreal and IClone is not a bad thing.
However, long term IClone users who have spent tens of thousands already are basically being told if they want better quality: "spend more money on content you already bought, and use Unreal's engine" instead of improving our own render engine so that our loyal customers can use what they purchased in our own software.
If Reallusion continues to improve their renderer and keeps increasing the quality of IClone, then no complaints from me. But this is not exactly the best news for people who really want to use their software.
|
|
By Rockoloco666 - 5 Years Ago
|
MEH to this announcement
|
|
By ccCreator - 5 Years Ago
|
|
Last year?? You have a strange concept of time, most of the features you mention are from 2 to 3 years ago
You're right, time flies. When did iClone 7 come out, mid-2017?
|
|
By ccCreator - 5 Years Ago
|
|
james_muia (1/17/2020)Yeah except now you need to spend tens of thousands for export licenses if you want to use any of your IClone content in Unreal.
Valid point. For me I don't think I've ever bought an asset without an export license. Mostly because I know that even if I'm making film/tv, I may need the asset for VR, AR or kicking it out to Unity or Cinema 4D. I've never really understood the logic behind iClone only assets. Too many limitations that way. That said, if I did have something like that, it's relatively inexpensive if I need to buy the export license to continue my project as needed. It's the cost of doing business.
|
|
By james_muia - 5 Years Ago
|
ccCreator (1/17/2020)
james_muia (1/17/2020)Yeah except now you need to spend tens of thousands for export licenses if you want to use any of your IClone content in Unreal.
Valid point. For me I don't think I've ever bought an asset without an export license. Mostly because I know that even if I'm making film/tv, I may need the asset for VR, AR or kicking it out to Unity or Cinema 4D. I've never really understood the logic behind iClone only assets. Too many limitations that way. That said, if I did have something like that, it's relatively inexpensive if I need to buy the export license to continue my project as needed. It's the cost of doing business.
Relatively inexpensive? I have to call BS on that. You try making a film that incorporates hundreds of different animations from IClone content, with tons of different characters and clothing and see how much all those export licenses cost you. Thousands!
The logic behind using Iclone only assets is simple. Long time users of IClone bought into this software to use it, not export out content to other programs. Sure there are some that have done that, but a majority of long time users of this software generally want to use IClone to make films.
And we're rightfully pissed, because of developments pushing people away from using their software into spending more money and using something else to render with.
Again, not saying this partnership with Unreal is bad. No it's a good thing for sure and will perhaps spark new things. But a lot of us want Reallusion to continue improving their own Renderer so we can get better quality out of their own software.
|
|
By AutoDidact - 5 Years Ago
|
What of the people using Daz content via CC3?
can they freely send to unreal??.
Just curious as I don't import to Iclone only export of motion to external rigs.
|
|
By GOETZIWOOD STUDIOS - 5 Years Ago
|
ccCreator (1/17/2020)
GOETZIWOOD STUDIOS (1/17/2020)
That's what you don't get. We don't need realtime renderer, we need a fast "enough" native renderer (from realtime to a few seconds per frame). Unreal and Unity, being realtime renderer, will never implement some advanced features that would cost too much drop in framerate. That's where iClone SHOULD shine today if Reallusion understood that from the beginning. For animating we need at least 30fps (but then we don't need full high quality rendering) and in this area there are still issues that will be hard to solve, because iClone can't rely on a cooking step. But for rendering, we don't need 30fps. Up to a few seconds per frame would be acceptable. Which obviously is not for a "realtime" renderer.Here's one place where you don't have good information. Unity and Unreal have Octane Renderer integration, via OToy, already on the market that produces the highest quality possible. Additionally Live Link uses iClone for animation at 60fps and Unreal for rendering. So what you are saying we need is EXACTLY what the solution provides../..
I have very good information, believe me, but you are not listening.
First, define "we". On my side I'm part of the "FEAR" "camp" (Fixe/Enhance nAtive Renderer).
So, as "we" from FEAR:
1) We don't need external renderers. Not sure in which language(s) we will have to repeat that. Indigo, iRay, Octane, etc.. are useless to us (to slow). Unreal, Unity, CryEngine, Lumberyard, etc.. are useless to us as external renderers. First because they need us to have the "Pipeline" version of every application plus the "Export" version of every content, which can cost a fortune ultimately. Second because it has been reported the Live Link can take a while to stream assets, and sometimes there are issues, which is a waste of time for a single hobbyist filmmaker iCloner.
2) We need the native renderer to be "fast enough" so it can render from realtime to a few seconds per frame so there is room to implement features (and I'm not talking about pathtracing) that neither Unreal nor Unity could use because too costly in time. This is what should make the iClone native renderer unique and wonderful, but we are not there yet. We want wysiwyg but it does not need to be in realtime.
3) We need realtime for animating of course, if possible, but while animating we don't need full quality rendering. So we need iClone and its native renderer to be smart enough to be able to switch to an efficient "animation mode" running at least at 30fps no matter what. Perhaps degrading visuals progressively depending on the "weight" of our scene.
ccCreator (1/17/2020)
That's irrelevant, Houdini, Motion Builder, etc.. are used in TV and Film that does not mean iCloners should learn and master them all. Using Unreal in TV and Film require much more technical knowledge and resources than one iCloner alone can usually support.
I said nothing about needing to learn MotionBuilder or Houdini. I said that Unreal and Unity are being used to render for TV and Film, at an extremely high quality. iClone would act as MotionBuilder in this equation.
No but in another message you prone the use of a multitude of applications altogether with iClone. My point is saying that ideally the less we need to use the better (including external renderer).
|
|
By TonyDPrime - 5 Years Ago
|
You don't need an export license with LiveLink. This is if you want to export FBX to each and every 3D engine out there directly from iClone.
Animagic brought up this point initially as a broad question, but somehow it spun out that you need export license with LiveLink. Nobody said you do.
The real question you need to ask yourself is this - how do you render once you have your animation in Unreal....??!!!
|
|
By james_muia - 5 Years Ago
|
|
TonyDPrime (1/17/2020)
You don't need an export license with LiveLink. This is if you want to export FBX to each and every 3D engine out there directly from iClone.
Animagic brought up this point initially as a broad question, but somehow it spun out that you need export license with LiveLink. Nobody said you do.
The real question you need to ask yourself is this - how do you render once you have your animation in Unreal....??!!!
No one said you didn't need an export license either. I don't even have pipeline so it's not like I can test it out. Good to know at least you don't need an export license for everything to use Livelink.
|
|
By WarLord - 5 Years Ago
|
No disrespect meant to anyone's opinion but I've used these products for almost as long as anyone. Since V1 on iClone but not the preceding app it came from. Reallusion will continue to improve the native render as they've done all along. Giving us other options is not a bad thing. They HAVE the resources to develop several products at once and have done so for over a decade.
Reallusion does not freely give out information that is not publicly posted. Maybe if you are involved in one of their projects you get to see a little of what they are doing but unless you are an employee, contracted to them or your last name is Martin... it's speculation.
Athos can make the native render look great without Unreal... just have to learn lighting and all the things that go with it (plus the Look is subjective to whomever is looking). There will be some disappointment from those that jump over and see that you have to learn the same things or buy them to get good renders in Unreal. Using iClone doesn't make any of us a shader expert.
This will open it up for more experts to come in and maybe help us all.
Speaking only for myself mouse pointing is a lot more productive than hand wringing.
|
|
By kungphu - 5 Years Ago
|
For exports, if you are trying to export a character or character wearing clothing you do not have an export license for, you need to purchase the export license. You’ll get an error when you try to animate dating you don’t have the export license. Huge drawback if you are tying to convert older projects with clothing or accessories that don’t have an export license. I had this headache recently converting an older project. I had to find out which items were giving the “you don’t have an export license error.”
IMO it’s way easier to start a new project either with a character or clothing you know you have the export license for, or just convert a Daz character with Daz clothing. No license errors that way. The biggest drawback with Unreal is losing cloth simulation and hair physics. The learning curve is big, but if you follow a basic unreal tutorial to learn how to move around in Unreal and the UI, Reallusions tutorials are fantastic to teach you how to use the Unreal plugin. They have an Unreal Playlist on their YouTube channel. That’s all I used and was able to redo a ~9min project from iclone to Unreal. I was really happy with the results aside from the loss of hair dynamics. The project was only animals so I didn’t have any clothing dynamics. It was recently accepted as an official selection to a film festival. It was made in either iclone 5 or 6. The visuals showed their age for sure.
|
|
By TonyDPrime - 5 Years Ago
|
james_muia (1/17/2020)
TonyDPrime (1/17/2020)
You don't need an export license with LiveLink. This is if you want to export FBX to each and every 3D engine out there directly from iClone.
Animagic brought up this point initially as a broad question, but somehow it spun out that you need export license with LiveLink. Nobody said you do.
The real question you need to ask yourself is this - how do you render once you have your animation in Unreal....??!!!
No one said you didn't need an export license either. I don't even have pipeline so it's not like I can test it out. Good to know at least you don't need an export license for everything to use Livelink.
If there was a requirement, it would be stipulated somewhere, otherwise there is no requirement. I mean otherwise 'not saying' could be the basis for any argument -
ie - Do I have to buy a dog in order to use iClone, because it doesn't anywhere say that I don't have to buy a dog to use iClone...
Part of the reason they originally had it as a paid plugin before was so that RL could cover its own compensation for such incidents where assets were moved outside of pipeline for rendering to UE4.
But it's not like there was some overriding external law or governing code, it was just a policy protocol they had in place.
Likewise, now you see that Indies have a different cost structure (FREE) vs professionals (PAID). This is because RL likely views that the # of incidents outside of pipeline of Indies to be inconsequential compared to # of incidents involving professionals. RL just wants to be compensated for its content when $ is made off of it by someone else. And they have had policies where they want to earn income for tools which allow assets to be transferred out, and/or to be utilized in another platform for rendering (ie Indigo, Iray) , but only after a threshold with the way they have it now in Unreal's case with Live Link.
And you can test it out:
(1) download the plugin and
(2) use UE4 for rendering.
RL is stating they will allow it Free. RL is allowed to do this if they wish to. And, it will benefit them economically, as we have been discussing.
More so, it will benefit them economically if we go to the UE4 forums and discuss the positives of iClone as a character creation and cinematic tool for UE4 game-dev pipeline.
|
|
By james_muia - 5 Years Ago
|
TonyDPrime (1/17/2020)
james_muia (1/17/2020)
TonyDPrime (1/17/2020)
You don't need an export license with LiveLink. This is if you want to export FBX to each and every 3D engine out there directly from iClone.
Animagic brought up this point initially as a broad question, but somehow it spun out that you need export license with LiveLink. Nobody said you do.
The real question you need to ask yourself is this - how do you render once you have your animation in Unreal....??!!!
No one said you didn't need an export license either. I don't even have pipeline so it's not like I can test it out. Good to know at least you don't need an export license for everything to use Livelink. If there was a requirement, it would be stipulated somewhere, otherwise there is no requirement. I mean otherwise 'not saying' could be the basis for any argument - ie - Do I have to buy a dog in order to use iClone, because it doesn't anywhere say that I don't have to buy a dog to use iClone... Part of the reason they originally had it as a paid plugin before was so that RL could cover its own compensation for such incidents where assets were moved outside of pipeline for rendering to UE4. But it's not like there was some overriding external law or governing code, it was just a policy protocol they had in place. Likewise, now you see that Indies have a different cost structure (FREE) vs professionals (PAID). This is because RL likely views that the # of incidents outside of pipeline of Indies to be inconsequential compared to # of incidents involving professionals. RL just wants to be compensated for its content when $ is made off of it by someone else. And they have had policies where they want to earn income for tools which allow assets to be transferred out, and/or to be utilized in another platform for rendering (ie Indigo, Iray) , but only after a threshold with the way they have it now in Unreal's case with Live Link. And you can test it out: (1) download the plugin and (2) use UE4 for rendering. RL is stating they will allow it Free. RL is allowed to do this if they wish to. And, it will benefit them economically, as we have been discussing. More so, it will benefit them economically if we go to the UE4 forums and discuss the positives of iClone as a character creation and cinematic tool for UE4 game-dev pipeline.
"BREAKING NEWS for our beloved community! We've made the iClone Unreal Live Link plug-in FREE for all Indies! So if you're an indie user who already owns iClone 7 & 3DXchange 7 Pipeline, then go get the plugin NOW. "
According to Reallusion you need 3DXchange 7 pipeline. You're saying I don't need pipeline. This is the kind of thing I'm talking about, nothing is ever stated that isn't confusing or some mis-information somewhere.
Then I get a bad analogy for simply asking a 'valid' question that was not addressed anywhere when Reallusion has not always been the best at providing simple "This is what you need to use this" for their products.
|
|
By rdegoede333 - 5 Years Ago
|
You hit the point to the core !!!
|
|
By TonyDPrime - 5 Years Ago
|
james_muia (1/17/2020)
TonyDPrime (1/17/2020)
james_muia (1/17/2020)
TonyDPrime (1/17/2020)
You don't need an export license with LiveLink. This is if you want to export FBX to each and every 3D engine out there directly from iClone.
Animagic brought up this point initially as a broad question, but somehow it spun out that you need export license with LiveLink. Nobody said you do.
The real question you need to ask yourself is this - how do you render once you have your animation in Unreal....??!!!
No one said you didn't need an export license either. I don't even have pipeline so it's not like I can test it out. Good to know at least you don't need an export license for everything to use Livelink. If there was a requirement, it would be stipulated somewhere, otherwise there is no requirement. I mean otherwise 'not saying' could be the basis for any argument - ie - Do I have to buy a dog in order to use iClone, because it doesn't anywhere say that I don't have to buy a dog to use iClone... "BREAKING NEWS for our beloved community! We've made the iClone Unreal Live Link plug-in FREE for all Indies! So if you're an indie user who already owns iClone 7 & 3DXchange 7 Pipeline, then go get the plugin NOW. "
According to Reallusion you need 3DXchange 7 pipeline. You're saying I don't need pipeline. This is the kind of thing I'm talking about, nothing is ever stated that isn't confusing or some mis-information somewhere.
Then I get a bad analogy for simply asking a 'valid' question that was not addressed anywhere when Reallusion has not always been the best at providing simple "This is what you need to use this" for their products.
Okay now this is interesting, where are you getting this from - I have seen 2 notices:
(1) An email in my account, and
(2) the thread at the beginning of this post
Both do not make reference as the statement you are quoting.
"So if you're an indie user who already owns iClone 7 & 3DXchange 7 Pipeline, then go get the plugin NOW"
This does not stipulate it as a requirement per say, in that, you 'could' coincidentally own the pipeline of 3DXchange.
In other words, it does not say, "Only eligible if you own Pipeline..."
Like, to me it seems more akin to saying "So, if you are ready to take the next step into the world of real time rendering in Unreal, go get the plugin now!"....
Like, it's not so much listed as a requirement, more so a product plug? Like "if you are already an exporting user, you will also definitely like this!"...you know?...
But okay, even still, exactly where are you seeing this text you are citing?
|
|
By TonyDPrime - 5 Years Ago
|
I am also seeing the EULA does not make reference to a restriction in reference the pipeline language either.
|
|
By animagic - 5 Years Ago
|
|
We wouldn't really need a full export license if there was a way to limit its applicability. There should be a difference between exporting for just rendering or using assets in a game for further exploitation. It might be the cost of "doing business", but unless you make a blockbuster, there is not much money in independent animation. It actually costs money. I don't mind that, but I don't want to waste it unnecessarily.
|
|
By soylent_graphics - 5 Years Ago
|
|
Many thanks! Indie is looking forward to test it. :-)
|
|
By TonyDPrime - 5 Years Ago
|
|
animagic (1/17/2020)
We wouldn't really need a full export license if there was a way to limit its applicability. There should be a difference between exporting for just rendering or using assets in a game for further exploitation. It might be the cost of "doing business", but unless you make a blockbuster, there is not much money in independent animation. It actually costs money. I don't mind that, but I don't want to waste it unnecessarily.
There actually are limits.
1) By itself, LiveLink requires the paid-for iClone to drive the animation. So, if you were to import in the non-export iClone asset via LiveLink into UE4, and then scrap the iClone part, you will then need an animation to be brought in onto the avatar in UE4 externally. In other words, your avatar is then left motionless....So, you then either can or cannot, depending on your licensed ability to export, send out FBX animations from the iClone ecosystem;
2) I think there are some soft cloth and hair animation limits as well (in fact, you may not be able to do soft cloth?)
But the greater point you made is the idea of cost. With respect to RL, probably it is more income-beneficial to advertise iClonian users having success with their product, rather than cost-press for each and every incident of asset move into Unreal.
The major potential golden jackpot at the end of the rainbow is Fortnite cash, not 3DXPipeline cash.
|
|
By Colonel_Klink - 5 Years Ago
|
TonyDPrime (1/17/2020)
james_muia (1/17/2020)
TonyDPrime (1/17/2020)
james_muia (1/17/2020)
TonyDPrime (1/17/2020)
You don't need an export license with LiveLink. This is if you want to export FBX to each and every 3D engine out there directly from iClone.
Animagic brought up this point initially as a broad question, but somehow it spun out that you need export license with LiveLink. Nobody said you do.
The real question you need to ask yourself is this - how do you render once you have your animation in Unreal....??!!!
No one said you didn't need an export license either. I don't even have pipeline so it's not like I can test it out. Good to know at least you don't need an export license for everything to use Livelink. If there was a requirement, it would be stipulated somewhere, otherwise there is no requirement. I mean otherwise 'not saying' could be the basis for any argument - ie - Do I have to buy a dog in order to use iClone, because it doesn't anywhere say that I don't have to buy a dog to use iClone... "BREAKING NEWS for our beloved community! We've made the iClone Unreal Live Link plug-in FREE for all Indies! So if you're an indie user who already owns iClone 7 & 3DXchange 7 Pipeline, then go get the plugin NOW. "
According to Reallusion you need 3DXchange 7 pipeline. You're saying I don't need pipeline. This is the kind of thing I'm talking about, nothing is ever stated that isn't confusing or some mis-information somewhere.
Then I get a bad analogy for simply asking a 'valid' question that was not addressed anywhere when Reallusion has not always been the best at providing simple "This is what you need to use this" for their products. Okay now this is interesting, where are you getting this from - I have seen 2 notices: (1) An email in my account, and (2) the thread at the beginning of this post Both do not make reference as the statement you are quoting. "So if you're an indie user who already owns iClone 7 & 3DXchange 7 Pipeline, then go get the plugin NOW"
This does not stipulate it as a requirement per say, in that, you 'could' coincidentally own the pipeline of 3DXchange. In other words, it does not say, "Only eligible if you own Pipeline..." Like, to me it seems more akin to saying "So, if you are ready to take the next step into the world of real time rendering in Unreal, go get the plugin now!".... Like, it's not so much listed as a requirement, more so a product plug? Like "if you are already an exporting user, you will also definitely like this!"...you know?... But okay, even still, exactly where are you seeing this text you are citing?
Tony.. from the iclone unreal live link page
And if you don't qualify you are sent to this:
|
|
By 4413Media - 5 Years Ago
|
Every time Reallusion releases something, everybody thinks the sky is falling. I've been watching this during my lunch break and now I have some time to add something :P
You will need 3Dxchange Pipeline, CC3 Pipeline, and an export license for characters. I tried bringing a character without one and it gave me a flat out no.
'It would appear that RL are forgetting the long-time loyal iClone users who have no interest in Game development, but still use the software for the original intended purpose - Filmmaking. '
Gerry, Unreal is moving fast towards the real-time filmmaking sector, it was a huge thing they have discussed at Siggraph 2019. They had huge conferences and classes about it. Funny thing, when Reallusion was showing off their live link, they were showing off work from previz studios since many are turning to the Unreal Engine for that and the Live Link will have a chance to help them greatly. I wrote an article for Renderosity Magazine covering this.
For those who are fearing about iclone's future... I wouldn't worry.
After talking to them, I'm more optimistic about where this heading. In the end really; it's up to you to determine what to work with and what works for your project. There's a Spanish community that still makes movies, props, and sets for a 15-year-old game that the developers have long since abandoned; they still find ways to express their creativity and it's a great lesson that people can find ways to work with what they got. Some food for thought.
|
|
By TonyDPrime - 5 Years Ago
|
Colonel_Klink (1/17/2020)
TonyDPrime (1/17/2020)
james_muia (1/17/2020)
TonyDPrime (1/17/2020)
james_muia (1/17/2020)
TonyDPrime (1/17/2020)
You don't need an export license with LiveLink. This is if you want to export FBX to each and every 3D engine out there directly from iClone.
Animagic brought up this point initially as a broad question, but somehow it spun out that you need export license with LiveLink. Nobody said you do.
The real question you need to ask yourself is this - how do you render once you have your animation in Unreal....??!!!
No one said you didn't need an export license either. I don't even have pipeline so it's not like I can test it out. Good to know at least you don't need an export license for everything to use Livelink. If there was a requirement, it would be stipulated somewhere, otherwise there is no requirement. I mean otherwise 'not saying' could be the basis for any argument - ie - Do I have to buy a dog in order to use iClone, because it doesn't anywhere say that I don't have to buy a dog to use iClone... "BREAKING NEWS for our beloved community! We've made the iClone Unreal Live Link plug-in FREE for all Indies! So if you're an indie user who already owns iClone 7 & 3DXchange 7 Pipeline, then go get the plugin NOW. "
According to Reallusion you need 3DXchange 7 pipeline. You're saying I don't need pipeline. This is the kind of thing I'm talking about, nothing is ever stated that isn't confusing or some mis-information somewhere.
Then I get a bad analogy for simply asking a 'valid' question that was not addressed anywhere when Reallusion has not always been the best at providing simple "This is what you need to use this" for their products. Okay now this is interesting, where are you getting this from - I have seen 2 notices: (1) An email in my account, and (2) the thread at the beginning of this post Both do not make reference as the statement you are quoting. "So if you're an indie user who already owns iClone 7 & 3DXchange 7 Pipeline, then go get the plugin NOW"
This does not stipulate it as a requirement per say, in that, you 'could' coincidentally own the pipeline of 3DXchange. In other words, it does not say, "Only eligible if you own Pipeline..." Like, to me it seems more akin to saying "So, if you are ready to take the next step into the world of real time rendering in Unreal, go get the plugin now!".... Like, it's not so much listed as a requirement, more so a product plug? Like "if you are already an exporting user, you will also definitely like this!"...you know?... But okay, even still, exactly where are you seeing this text you are citing? Tony.. from the iclone unreal live link page And if you don't qualify you are sent to this:
James Muia and Colonel Clink - I am 100% wrong then.
WRONG
100%
I AM WRONG!
RL - Reconsider - there are already limits to use of LiveLink
1) animations through LiveLink still require use of the paid for iClone engine.
2) Even if an avatar is transferred in, when a LiveLink connection ceases, the user is left with a motionless asset, requiring an FBX animation.
Thus, even if you want to bring in an FBX animation, you can't unless you have Pipeline. So pipeline content remains protected as use is already tiered.
3) A greater # users has much more influence over the UE4 crowd. Reward iClone users for participating in the plugin and visiting the UE4 forums.
|
|
By ccCreator - 5 Years Ago
|
|
1) We don't need external renderers. Not sure in which language(s) we will have to repeat that. Indigo, iRay, Octane, etc.. are useless to us (to slow). Unreal, Unity, CryEngine, Lumberyard, etc.. are useless to us as external renderers. First because they need us to have the "Pipeline" version of every application plus the "Export" version of every content, which can cost a fortune ultimately. Second because it has been reported the Live Link can take a while to stream assets, and sometimes there are issues, which is a waste of time for a single hobbyist filmmaker iCloner.
The "we" you are talking about are folks who want AAA rendering, but don't want to pay the cost in speed and paying the money for export options that is takes to achieve these things. That's unrealistic.
2) We need the native renderer to be "fast enough" so it can render from realtime to a few seconds per frame so there is room to implement features (and I'm not talking about pathtracing) that neither Unreal nor Unity could use because too costly in time. This is what should make the iClone native renderer unique and wonderful, but we are not there yet. We want wysiwyg but it does not need to be in realtime.
Whether it be Unity, Unreal, Cinema 4D, Blender, Houdini, etc; they all use 3rd party render solutions when it comes to getting the best quality. Whether that be Octane, Maxwell, Arnold, Renderman, etc. IMHO, it's an unrealistic expectation that RL or any program will be able to create the native render engine you seek that will render out that quality in 30fps. Evee is probably the best when it comes to that metric, and it still has limitations. My point is, while waiting for that magic renderer and hardware to drive it to be created, there is nothing wrong with using other render solutions out there if you want AAA render results that don't fall into the range of hobbyist.
3) We need realtime for animating of course, if possible, but while animating we don't need full quality rendering. So we need iClone and its native renderer to be smart enough to be able to switch to an efficient "animation mode" running at least at 30fps no matter what. Perhaps degrading visuals progressively depending on the "weight" of our scene.
Maybe I'm missing it but isn't this exactly what iClone currently offers right now? Realtime animation without full quality rendering. I ask that in all honesty because that's EXACTLY how I currently use iClone and where I see it's strength.
And about the export thing, if you want to have the best renders possible with the most options possible -- DON'T buy iClone only content. Always buy the export option. Especially working with clients, it's absolutely useless to do iClone only because they virtually always have to take your work and put it into some other app. Whether it be using it for web, compositing into larger video/film projects, VR, AR, print, etc; it's just not a wise move to go with the iClone only option. You end up paying for it later. As you are now finding out.
|
|
By TonyDPrime - 5 Years Ago
|
I think one of the reasons why there is a gripe on this is in the way it came up, because it was announced as a tease without mentioning limitation, and right or wrong everyone imagined it will benefit them.
But then when it comes out, it winds up being exclusive to a degree and leaves some users out. So some of it is a feeling of disappointment.
Like imagine being a kid in a class an your teacher says "I have great news to announce later!..." And everyone is excited, thinking it will be great news for them.
And the the teacher says 2 days later, "Everyone who got a 90 or better in last test, no homework!" You'd have a lot of people feeling excluded and dejected.
That's what this is like. It actually inadvertently feeds into some of the forum divisiveness with bad feelings.
|
|
By ccCreator - 5 Years Ago
|
|
TonyDPrime (1/18/2020)
I think one of the reasons why there is a gripe on this is in the way it came up, because it was announced as a tease without mentioning limitation, and right or wrong everyone imagined it will benefit them.
But then when it comes out, it winds up being exclusive to a degree and leaves some users out. So some of it is a feeling of disappointment.
Like imagine being a kid in a class an your teacher says "I have great news to announce later!..." And everyone is excited, thinking it will be great news for them.
And the the teacher says 2 days later, "Everyone who got a 90 or better in last test, no homework!" You'd have a lot of people feeling excluded and dejected.
That's what this is like. It actually inadvertently feeds into some of the forum divisiveness with bad feelings.
Yeah, can totally agree with that.
|
|
By animagic - 5 Years Ago
|
I would like to point out to the external renderer champions that there have been attempts by RL to offer access to other render options that do away with the expert hassle. There is just not enough incentive by RL to do further development in that direction. Iray was an improvement over Indigo, but unfortunately there are shortcomings that are no longer worked on.
Years ago, when Indigo was introduced, one RL official gave the impression that this was only the beginning and that other renderers would follow. So it doesn't really matter if it is the native renderer or some third-party solution within iClone that circumvents the export problems. It's not just the expense, but also the hassle of getting shaders to work etc.
EDIT: Toned it down a bit. Not worth making a fuss over really.
|
|
By ccCreator - 5 Years Ago
|
You're right, getting the shaders to work right is an issue. That's why I'm exploring using Unreal right now, instead of my Unity go to. Even with the Auto setup in Unity, you still have to fiddle a lil bit with the shaders. So I'm down for all the options. When a better native renderer comes one day, I'll be all about it. But until then I'm going to use what gives me the best results and not spend energy I could be using learning new tools instead of whi… complaining about what iClone renderer can't do.
There is also issues of dynamic environments with day/night cycles, volumetric cloud, fog and lighting, fluid dynamics, more sophisticated asset culling to address RAM issues, more sophisticated shaders like VFX graphs (which Popcorn integration attempts to address) and a few others. Reallusion is close, but the things left on the list are extremely heavy processes.
|
|
By nikofilm - 5 Years Ago
|
|
Hello, everyone!!! Since 2 days I have been reading the controversy over what looks better - iClone or Unreal. Both programs have pros and cons. IClone is much more convenient and fast to use. If you play around with the lights and cameras a little, you can get a Unreal-like vision. The only remarks so far for iClone that they need to optimize their engine so we can safely insert more characters and have more options for character animations. Something similar to Akeytsu. I made one video in 4 days. Made by iClone and edited by Adobe Premiere. I think the vision is not that bad with Unreal. Clip iClone |
|
By GOETZIWOOD STUDIOS - 5 Years Ago
|
|
@ccCreator Regarding the export and pipeline options: AFAIK, the "export" option is meant for assets that you have to share with the "client" or the public, in a game for instance. But we shouldn't need an export option for just creating images with an asset, as long as we don't pass along the asset itself.
That said, I believe you still don't get what I wrote, but it is probably my fault, failing to clearly enough explaining the idea. So I'll try again:
It is not a question of wanting AAA rendering. If I wanted AAA results today, I wouldn't use iClone at all. I wouldn't even use Unreal not Unity, those are not AAA renderers for film nor TV ((*)more about that and Mandalorian below). At work I have used pretty much all 3d related softwares that exist on the market and I'm very well aware about the costs, the efforts and the knowledge required to achieve AAA results.
But here I am a hobbyist seeking for the "one man movie" fantasy and I like iClone because it represents the relatively simple central tool that can render this fantasy (almost) possible, a bit like a DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) in sound and music. Of course we need assets, and we can get those either from the Content Store, the Marketplace or any other 3D providers. And of course we have the great Character Creator tool, and we can create our own assets from any 3D DCC tool.
Then we need animations. Again we can get those from the Content Store, the Marketplace or any other 3D providers. Here though, we have more options from Reallusion as we can use some external devices for realtime puppeteering and motion capture, granted you acquire the needed plugins. We can even capture facial performances which is really great. But if I wanted AAA workflow for editing animation, I would use MotionBuilder. Last but not least, we can create the animation manually. But here iClone lack the tools needed by professional animators and I'm not talking about the "Curve Editor" lol, which shouldn't be a "plugin" but the basis of all softwares using animations. No I'm talking about rigging. No professional animator directly animate a skeleton, professional animators use "rigs" created by the rigging team. These "rigs" expose controls that will be animated but the underlying construction is made of constraints, expressions, scripts, widgets, corrective shapes, linked animation clips, etc.. that only expert riggers knows how to create.
That said, with a bit of elbow grease, pretty decent results can be achieved from someone knowing what he is doing.
But the current issue we have with iClone and animation and I'm not sure if you have tried to animate complexe scenes with more than a few Avatars, iClone CANT sustain 30fps or realtime fps for animation. It needs to have some mechanism that gracefully and wisely degrade the visuals and some other features so it can keep realtime playback when animating, no matter what. In any other 3D DCC tool we can achieve much higher performances in this matter.
Regarding rendering: and this is what I mean when I say "you are not listening": ccCreator (1/18/2020)
2) We need the native renderer to be "fast enough" so it can render from realtime to a few seconds per frame so there is room to implement features (and I'm not talking about pathtracing) that neither Unreal nor Unity could use because too costly in time. This is what should make the iClone native renderer unique and wonderful, but we are not there yet. We want wysiwyg but it does not need to be in realtime. ../.. Whether that be Octane, Maxwell, Arnold, Renderman, etc. IMHO, it's an unrealistic expectation that RL or any program will be able to create the native render engine you seek that will render out that quality in 30fps../..
I just said in 2) we need the native renderer to be fast enough, meaning from realtime to a few seconds per frame and that it does not need to be in realtime. I'm not saying rendering out "that" quality in 30fps ! So please read carefully ;).
I'm saying that the advantage iClone has over a realtime game engine/renderer is exactly that: iClone does not need to render in realtime and I believe all iCloners "filmmakers" would agree that rendering up to a few seconds per frame is still ok. That extra time that iClone has to render an image over a realtime game engine/renderer should be an advantage and exploited to implement features and tricks that a game engine/render couldn't (and not to hide unoptimized rendering features ;)).
(*)Regarding Unreal used for Mandalorian, it is irrelevant to bring these kind of argument to justify the use of Unreal over iClone: 1) It is used for previz. Well, iClone alone can perfectly do that. For blocking and previz work, no need for Unreal. 2) It is used for rearprojection on LED panels for virtual set extension. DOP explicitely said those projected images are often blurred a bit to accomodate DOF. Not all shots work with that system though. 3) Unreal is not used to render full 3D images for the show. Those are done with AAA renderer.
That being said, it is great to see iClone has now a link to Unreal, I'm not against it of course, just saying that it should not be needed to produce images with the quality we are nowadays used to from realtime renderers.
I'm pretty sure Reallusion will find the right solution. The question is: When ? :)
|
|
By sonic7 - 5 Years Ago
|
@GOETZIWOOD " .... and I believe all iCloners "filmmakers" would agree that rendering up to a few seconds per frame is still ok ..... "
I certainly agree with that.
|
|
By ccCreator - 5 Years Ago
|
@GoETZIWOOD Thanks for the lengthy and well thought out response. I now realize even more that we are saying exactly the same thing, just in a different way. A little background, I am a CGI artist that has worked extensively in broadcast and film in LA. I've used all the packages, I model, rig and animate. I also have some experience using advanced external renders in Unity. In those instances, I am not used to Unity, a realtime rendering engine, giving me realtime performance for exporting the full res version. When using Octane/OTOY the render actually takes several seconds to output a frame. It takes even longer when you are doing scenes with volumetrics and long draw distances. So in those instances Unity and Unreal are no longer "realtime" they are simply a renderer that gets you frames in a second or two; just as you are describing. Additionally the capture solutions to record linear playback from Unity (like Helios3D for example) do not record in realtime either. It takes several seconds per frame to record full quality 4K captures, and then additional time to convert those stills into usable video. So from my opinion and experience, none of it is actually 30fps realtime.
As far as everything else you said, I agree. Even with the Mandalorian. It was just an example, but a more straight-line example would be Baymax Dreams by Disney. In the 3 short films, they are directly using Unity engine to create and render the final product. There is another weekly cartoon series that is currently using Unity as the complete workflow, although at the moment the project title escapes me. Adam and The Heretic are other great example of Unity (the one I have the most experience with) producing striking, AAA linear content.
But the current issue we have with iClone and animation and I'm not sure if you have tried to animate complexe scenes with more than a few Avatars, iClone CANT sustain 30fps or realtime fps for animation. It needs to have some mechanism that gracefully and wisely degrade the visuals and some other features so it can keep realtime playback when animating, no matter what. In any other 3D DCC tool we can achieve much higher performances in this matter.
I think that it may have come across that I'm against iClone having a better native renderer. Let me be clear, that is not the case. What I'm saying is that iClone DOESN'T have a better renderer with dealing with these things, none the least being the sophisticated asset and shader culling that allow Unity and Unreal to achieve what they do. The mechanism that gracefully degrade visuals and features are already present in Unreal and Unity in the form of LODs, texture streaming and burst compilers like DOTS/ECS and it will be a long while before iClone will get there. My position is simply this. In the meantime (2-3 years) we as creators shouldn't just turn our noses up to using external solutions. Yes it means we have to use exportable content, we have to accept that going in. Because of that mindset I have been able to receive this news of free Live Link with open arms and knowing that every project I've every done in iClone can immediately be sent out in this new workflow, because I've always sent EVERYTHING out to render to begin with. Either to Unity, Cinema 4D, Blender, or Dimension/Aero. The reality is, iClone just isn't there yet. It's great prefab-ish, quick character animation. Great now for facial and full body motion capture. But, for me, I have never bought into the "fantasy" as you put it that it could do it all well.
I hope that makes sense as well.
|
|
By ccCreator - 5 Years Ago
|
Posting this as a point of reference to the power that realtime game/rendering engines like Unreal and Unity can provide. These things do more than just more than games, they are excellent at making cinematic videos. They're the reason that iClone and Character Creator spent so much time giving us excellent export and Link options. When I say things like iClone renderer isn't as good as what you can achieve with these engines, this is an example of what I'm referring too. No reason to limit yourself to just iClone, instead it's all part of a workflow.
The Heretic
Sidenote: If what iClone currently renders is good enough for your uses, EXCELLENT! You are fortunate to have the easiest solution. If you don't want to learn how to integrate these new tools and only want to use iClone, then that is okay too. Just know that it's out there if you don't want to wait and iClone can plug right into it.
|
|
By AutoDidact - 5 Years Ago
|
|
Just a freindly reminder that for some of us "external rendering champions" it is not just the render engines capabilties that causes us to use external programs for scene building and final delivery. The scene item management tools,in iclone, are extemely primitive and completley unusable for large team oriented projects !!!,
particularly for the dense sci fi environments, that I prefer with often hundreds of scene items that can be folded up into nested hierarchies and hidden with a click for better viewport performance while scene building. Reallusion is wise to offer many options for people outside of the core, closed garden ,hobbiest user base. it is the only way to grow your market. That said, I personally do not think alot of AAA gaming studios Will ever leave MAYA due to entrenched habits although Ubisoft recently switched to Blender 2.8 ,as I am doing, for my new delivery environment after my C4D rendered marvel fan film is finally completed this winter.
|
|
By TonyDPrime - 5 Years Ago
|
|
Is there anyone here who is Pipeline but is not interested in using the plugin?
|
|
By animagic - 5 Years Ago
|
|
TonyDPrime (1/18/2020)
Is there anyone here who is Pipeline but is not interested in using the plugin?
I have pipeline and until i can see a clear example of going from iClone to Unreal ,I pass for the moment.
That said, I do have a very simple scene I may try to convert. That is, if I'm even eligible...:unsure:
|
|
By Peter (RL) - 5 Years Ago
|
GOETZIWOOD STUDIOS (1/18/2020)
Regarding the export and pipeline options: AFAIK, the "export" option is meant for assets that you have to share with the "client" or the public, in a game for instance. But we shouldn't need an export option for just creating images with an asset, as long as we don't pass along the asset itself.
The export license allows you to transfer the iClone/CC content to other 3D software for rendering to video or image formats or for use embedded in games or apps. So in the case of Unreal Live Link, you are actually transferring the content to Unreal which is why you need an export license even if you are only planning to render images or video in Unreal.
|
|
By Rockoloco666 - 5 Years Ago
|
Peter (RL) (1/20/2020)
GOETZIWOOD STUDIOS (1/18/2020)
Regarding the export and pipeline options: AFAIK, the "export" option is meant for assets that you have to share with the "client" or the public, in a game for instance. But we shouldn't need an export option for just creating images with an asset, as long as we don't pass along the asset itself. The export license allows you to transfer the iClone/CC content to other 3D software for rendering to video or image formats or for use embedded in games or apps. So in the case of Unreal Live Link, you are actually transferring the content to Unreal which is why you need an export license even if you are only planning to render images or video in Unreal.
That needs to be in big red letters, it should have been included with the announcement
|
|
By GOETZIWOOD STUDIOS - 5 Years Ago
|
Peter (RL) (1/20/2020)
GOETZIWOOD STUDIOS (1/18/2020)
Regarding the export and pipeline options: AFAIK, the "export" option is meant for assets that you have to share with the "client" or the public, in a game for instance. But we shouldn't need an export option for just creating images with an asset, as long as we don't pass along the asset itself. The export license allows you to transfer the iClone/CC content to other 3D software for rendering to video or image formats or for use embedded in games or apps. So in the case of Unreal Live Link, you are actually transferring the content to Unreal which is why you need an export license even if you are only planning to render images or video in Unreal.
Thanks Peter, I stand corrected. I thought rendering images with an asset and releasing a game or application containing that asset was considered as two different things, as it is usually the case from some other content providers.
Now that this is cleared, it shows how even more important it is to have the native iClone renderer fixed and enhanced. Because none of those doing only renderings would spend or can afford to spend export licenses.
Rendering through Unreal would cost a fortune in export content licenses (which is not the case with Indigo or iRay).
I understand though that from Reallusion point of view, you can't know if someone will use an asset for rendering or for releasing once that asset has been transferred to Unreal.
Another good reason for taking care of the native iClone renderer.
|
|
By 3dtester - 5 Years Ago
|
If i would be a game developer, i would ask myself: 'should i buy CC3 + iClone Pipeline to be able to use the free Live Link plugin?
|
|
By musicaz - 5 Years Ago
|
|
Basically i just deleted my very long winded and useless post that doesnt accomplish anything usefull . Just saying i give up , this is too complicated for me to understand.. Thanks everyone for letting me ramble on .
|
|
By Eric C (RL) - 5 Years Ago
|
Dear all,
Just in case many of you do not know the news and have not claimed the plugin, I am replying the post as reminder.
Hope you all enjoyed our plugin!
|
|