|
Terrorforge posted:The run feels kind of slow and unenergetic, especially in the transition from standing to running. He just kinda crouches together and then immediately breaks into a leisurely jog, when a dog in this situation would be lunging forward and, if it had to keep going, break into a full run. Thanks! Trying to work on keeping the anticipation but amping up the leap into the run. Here's some cycles for the dog: Gallop (still needs some work) https://youtu.be/jm1PeoVgy9k Trot (I'm pretty happy with this one) https://youtu.be/bdMytYNWksE Ccs fucked around with this message at 00:26 on Aug 29, 2018 |
#
?
Aug 29, 2018 00:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 22:56 |
|
|
Ccs posted:Thanks! Trying to work on keeping the anticipation but amping up the leap into the run. To me it seems a little stuck in one axis, a bit “floaty”, the legs move fine but it’s lacking a bit of “weight” in the body and ears and tail imo
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2018 02:06
|
|
|
The Gasmask posted:Hah, I didn’t want to use modern movies as it makes our shot count seem piddling! Titanic felt like a good reference, it’s older but has what seems like a bunch of CG, and the quality isn’t terrible from what I recall. Speaking of (sorta), any general advice on "good enough" CG oceans and ship wakes / bow waves? That MHC trailer had some nice aerial shots right at the start, how were those (especially the wakes and bow waves) done? I'm hoping to find examples that don't require extensive fluid simulation, since I'm not ready to tackle that yet and my results don't have to be broadcast quality (and I don't have physical models to shoot in giant tanks like Titanic did for tricky interactions!) edit: crazy set of interviews from a bunch of VFX people who worked on Titanic, apparently there was more digital water than I thought! https://www.fxguide.com/featured/titanic-stories/ One of many insane stories: This https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZ690elR33s&t=7s TEN SECOND slow motion shot of Jack and Rose running at the camera is a full face/head replacement over stunt doubles, and they had to manually redo the lighting since the lights were flickering differently in the three separate takes. You can sort of tell if you're looking for at, right at the start, but drat. All 2D, no auto-stabilization or tracking. quote:Little things became very big tasks to fix, like Kate was wearing her earrings when she did the dry run but her stunt double was not when she did the run in the water drop. In that particular part of the shot I was maintaining the stunt woman's hair but comping in Kate's face right up into the hair line. Because they were not running in the same place at the same time the bounce of the earrings was different so they had to be removed and re animated to match the bounce of the stunt doubles run. Again this was all a 2D fix so all lighting and reflection changes on the earrings had to be animated to match the plate. Prolonged Panorama fucked around with this message at 05:59 on Aug 29, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2018 04:10
|
|
|
My advice for wakes and ocean stuff its all about the foam / spray detail. Crank that up pretty high resolution wise once you get your settings dialed on. NOTE: This doesn't apply for displacements / the ocean surface itself. A lot of software will link the resolution of the two together resulting in huge rear end sim times if you let it. I've often ran ocean sims/waves at 4x lower simulation/resolution than the foam/spray sims. You can get away with complete murder on the ocean geometry/surface with a really high resolution foam/spray layer on top of it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 02:30
|
|
|
Hello, I'd like some advice: I've been climbing the 3DCG learning curve (i.e. Blender) for the past year and a half so that I could create content for my Unreal Engine game (I'm a programmer), but I'm incredibly off-and-on with it and once I got past the fundamentals by doing all of the basics my pace of learning really crept down a lot to the point that I'm pretty dissatisfied with myself about it. I wish I could hire a 3D Artist to do this stuff for me, but I can't afford it unfortunately and my Patreon thing is only at $13 per month... so I gotta power through this myself and I need help staying on this 3D CG horse, so to speak. What I'm looking for advice with is how to find some inspiration to get back on the learning curve. Some things that have worked for me in the past are:
Welp, that's my post! Thanks for reading and sorry for being dumb. Love Stole the Day fucked around with this message at 05:54 on Aug 30, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 05:42
|
|
|
Animation-wise it's hard to have a "right" way as long as the finished poses and timing ends up correct. There's several accepted methods, the pose-to-pose method and the layered method. A lot of games animators tend to like the layered method, while TV and film animators prefer poses, though most Pixar animators also use the layered method. For games though its mostly cycles so if you just check the poses what are accepted game cycles and try to match them then you'll get what you're looking for. And if its something you can't find ref for, shoot reference of yourself and copy the poses and timing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2018 16:09
|
|
|
Love Stole the Day posted:Hello, I'd like some advice: Your problem is motivation, from what I understand? For a personal project, the motivation should come from within, to keep going when you hit those walls. When you stop because you can't figure out the solution, that sounds like you're not too interested in that part of your project. Personally I know I'm interested in something when I'm at work and I can't wait to get back home to try new things, or solving problems in a different way. Not finding the answer in Google isn't really an issue. If you get really stuck you post questions online and hopefully someone answers, and you do something else in the meantime? From the outside, I'd ask - what level of proficiency do you require for this project? Is it worth it (for you) to reach that level, or would you be better off using that time to find a volunteer? What motivated you in the first place? In short, either pay for better training or spend the time figuring things out, that's the fun of personal projects 🤷🏻♂️ edit: Is this one of those 1-man project games? Those are like vanity/ego projects imo, you know they take like 5-10 years to make right? https://www.gamesradar.com/10-games-developed-entirely-one-person/ Even if it is, more power to you and Godspeed Comfy Fleece Sweater fucked around with this message at 05:16 on Aug 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2018 05:07
|
|
|
Any recommendations for presenting product renders for 180 degree viewing? Ideally I would like to send a standalone file which the client can easily rotate. no frills needed. Or if there are mobile solutions where I am able to load the image sequence and have it be able to send a turntable animation that the client can rotate in the app. It’s just an image sequence rotating 180 degrees on a single axis
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2018 07:31
|
|
|
KinkyJohn posted:Any recommendations for presenting product renders for 180 degree viewing? No VR180, just showing a product infront of you rotating 180 degrees around to show it off? Why not just do the simplest thing, and make it into a video file. Anything can run it. Have it go back and forth and loop. Quality is easily adjusted, as is length, and you've got basically universal support. Only difference is that they'd need to wait + pause, or scrub in the timeline to view specific frames, but that's something people are already familiar with thanks to youtube and the like. Alternatively you could see if there's a simple unity project or plugin available that would let you set up a small standalone to do it. Is this something you'll be presenting on your own devices, or something that you'll be sending out?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2018 13:56
|
|
|
I figured I'd mentions something useful I learned recently. It seems like a simple thing but it was a total pain in the rear end to figure out. So basically I'm working on a game that has a bunch of different ships but use the same weapons and such. I know they're better ways to do it but each ship got the reused modules wrapped up in it's textures. Instead of messing around with moving things around for each ship I decided to kill the reused stuff a 1024 second in the lower left of the UV space. I know something like UDIM may have been better but that's not supported. Only issue is everything I tried didn't really let me pin things there so i can up with a work around. Make a square and put it in the area you want to reserve. This will work with anything, even multiple shells. I tried doing this with all the reused modules but copying over the PDR textures was an extra pain.  Bring it into RizomUV, the only program I could find that supports this well, and lock the square. If you're new to the program I have some selection settings set on the left hand bar that will help. The lock button is on the top right there.  Set you pack settings to what you want - below is what I use.  Click the pack without scaling or transform button. The one in the lower left of the below.  It'll pack and you'll have some over hang outside of the normal UV space.  Resize everything but the square (click the square and hit ctrl-i) and repack again to just outside the UV space. It might take some adjustment but eventually you'll get something like this.  Bring everything back in  Delete the square, import the reused modules, and copy over any other pieces that are being reused in the scene itself.  The gaps in the lower left are things that this ship doesn't have. Bonus in game screen shot. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2018 22:20
|
|
|
Another thing. Those thinking of going into freelancing should be aware that it's much harder to learn new things or develop as an artist in general (see the above). I've been free lancing for quite some time and I feel that I'm way behind my friends that have gotten studio jobs. It doesn't help that I only do 3D stuff in my free time. Even so it's really hard to beat what you learn by someone coming over to your desk and going "Try doing that like this." It's also pretty much impossible for more experienced people to notice you doing something and letting you know there is an easier way to do it. Doing things like sitting the the Polycount Hangout helps with that but there isn't always people in there when I'm working on stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2018 22:25
|
|
|
Prolonged Priapism posted:Speaking of (sorta), any general advice on "good enough" CG oceans and ship wakes / bow waves? That MHC trailer had some nice aerial shots right at the start, how were those (especially the wakes and bow waves) done? I'm hoping to find examples that don't require extensive fluid simulation, since I'm not ready to tackle that yet and my results don't have to be broadcast quality (and I don't have physical models to shoot in giant tanks like Titanic did for tricky interactions!) I don't have much info for you here, sorry. The MHC sims were done by the amazing Houdini artist Saber, and he has some tutorials for some of the techniques he uses, but most of that stuff is far beyond my skill. I'm hoping to start diving into Houdini soon, but I've got so much on my plate (need to learn Clarisse as well...) that I just haven't had the chance. Unrelated, but I have another project to show off! The car commercial thing I worked on was just released! Model adjustments+unwrap done in Blender, Texturing done in Substance Painter, shading done in Arnold. This guy had a pretty short timeline and a number of last-second changes, but I think we did good. I think the most complicated part was nailing an acceptable level of grunge - car commercials tend to have super clean vehicles, but they asked for some wear+patina on this. It was challenging to make it visible but not make the car look "dirty", and I think the final grunge pass works well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6k3F-SI830
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2018 17:27
|
|
|
The Gasmask posted:I don't have much info for you here, sorry. The MHC sims were done by the amazing Houdini artist Saber, and he has some tutorials for some of the techniques he uses, but most of that stuff is far beyond my skill. I'm hoping to start diving into Houdini soon, but I've got so much on my plate (need to learn Clarisse as well...) that I just haven't had the chance. Looks clean. quick question, how do you match the car with the set? matchmoving software or something else? Does blender do matchmoving natively?
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2018 18:25
|
|
|
Prolonged Priapism posted:Speaking of (sorta), any general advice on "good enough" CG oceans and ship wakes / bow waves? That MHC trailer had some nice aerial shots right at the start, how were those (especially the wakes and bow waves) done? I'm hoping to find examples that don't require extensive fluid simulation, since I'm not ready to tackle that yet and my results don't have to be broadcast quality (and I don't have physical models to shoot in giant tanks like Titanic did for tricky interactions!) I was thinking about this a bit more. If 'good enough' is all you need, I think fluid fx are pretty easy with something like phoenix. It's got presets for everything you need and a day of iterating and simulating overnight should give you what you need. The difficulty with simulations is when you try to art direct it - getting really specific things to happen, an explosion to hit a certain height in the frame etc. There's a ship in the ocean example scene with phoenix - https://docs.chaosgroup.com/display/PHX3MAX/Example+Scenes Easy enough to swap the boat out and change the scale. You could also go super old school if you want to cut down on simulation time - you can render the wake at the back with a top down camera grabbing particle/depth/normals etc , make the animation loop in AE and apply it to a plane with displacement. you can also do this with the splashes at the side - grab a couple variations and some occasional bigger ones and place them around the base of the boat on bent surfaces. That way you've only got to do one short sim for everything.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2018 19:17
|
|
|
Odddzy posted:Looks clean. quick question, how do you match the car with the set? matchmoving software or something else? Does blender do matchmoving natively? That’s handled by the incredible Nuke team my client has. They’re really drat good at making accurate tracks. Though if you want to track in Blender, I’ve heard good things about Blam in conjunction with the internal tracking tools. That’s been used by Theory on a bunch of gigs. The only times I’ve ever tracked are by hand or a very brief attempt at using the tracker in Blender (which isn’t bad but I’m just not good). This also makes me realize I should probably preface more with what I do since not everyone may be familiar. I’m a shading artist primarily, have a couple different places I do work for, so for this project for example, I did just that for one of them: texture and shader creation. An incredible team handled all the other aspects, and even gave the car some final love. I’m proud of how much I’ve grown artistically, but that growth is coming from working with a pool of talented and crazy smart people who can make my work look way better than it should!
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2018 19:52
|
|
|
The Gasmask posted:I don't have much info for you here, sorry. The MHC sims were done by the amazing Houdini artist Saber, and he has some tutorials for some of the techniques he uses, but most of that stuff is far beyond my skill. I'm hoping to start diving into Houdini soon, but I've got so much on my plate (need to learn Clarisse as well...) that I just haven't had the chance. Jeez I think it looks loving awesome, dent deformation looked pretty nice too, how long does your part in this take ?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 00:16
|
|
|
how are you supposed to feel when your client really wants a specific end result but it looks awful, but you need the money
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 01:14
|
|
|
Kanine posted:how are you supposed to feel when your client really wants a specific end result but it looks awful, but you need the money Annoyed, yet able to pay rent
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 01:22
|
|
|
Taffer posted:Annoyed, yet able to pay rent 
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 01:29
|
|
|
Kanine posted:how are you supposed to feel when your client really wants a specific end result but it looks awful, but you need the money Frustrated, but also righteous in a petty way
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 01:38
|
|
|
Comfy Fleece Sweater posted:Jeez I think it looks loving awesome, dent deformation looked pretty nice too, how long does your part in this take ? Thanks! If I got their workflow right, the dent was a sculpted mesh and I think it was a comp fade between the clean and dented meshes. I did a clean white set, a clean steel set, and a dented steel set, and they did the sweet fades and rim switches and the like. My part on this one was ~3 weeks, of which about 2 was daily and the third week was occasional touch up. That’s on the shorter side for me, but for every 9-12 month long TV production I’m on, I’m also working seven other 2-week to 2-month projects. The long ones are where I figure out new techniques, and the short ones are where I refine the hell out of them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 05:25
|
|
|
Kanine posted:how are you supposed to feel when your client really wants a specific end result but it looks awful, but you need the money Haha, this was such a struggle for me for like a year. I was losing my mind at some of the terrible requests I was getting. But I learned the zen of not giving a gently caress, and it did wonders for my mental health. Now, if the client wants something that I think looks off, I’ll do it, but make note of my concerns, and do some prep for the right way. Sometimes they stick with the bad one, but being able to immediately jump in with “here’s how me make it look good” when they finally realize their mistake makes you look good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 05:30
|
|
|
Kanine posted:how are you supposed to feel when your client really wants a specific end result but it looks awful, but you need the money A producer sat me down and sat me straight on a show early on in my career. First CG show I worked on had a large budget per episode.. $500k US per episode [in 2000ish] and a distinct look. The second series had a much smaller budget around 200k. To fit the budget we decided to drop the fidelity/quality bar to speed up production and have less retakes/technical issues. I went to the producer with a new lighting model/rig that could improve shadow quality and the overall look of that show, but the producer stopped me dead in my tracks and said they aren't paying for it and we're not giving it to them for free, because they'll keep expecting it. So we went to blinn shaders, and fixed generic shadow splat maps under the characters. Kinda sucks knowing you could push the bar on the low-end side of things but I saw the producers point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 17:13
|
|
|
SubNat posted:No VR180, just showing a product infront of you rotating 180 degrees around to show it off? Well I guess I’m then looking for a video player that will accomodate scrubbing in a friendlier way. I know quicktime lets you scrub a bit more smoothly, I’m just wondering if theres a better recommendation
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 12:42
|
|
|
ive always used 3ds max and im poking around with learning maya and honestly i kind of hate maya
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 20:49
|
|
|
Kanine posted:ive always used 3ds max and im poking around with learning maya and honestly i kind of hate maya I feel the same way about Max. I think there is a certain frustration when switching softwares because of all the muscle memory you've built up being useless. I've gotten so used to snapping features and marking menu in Maya I don't know if I'll ever be able to switch away if I need to - I'm just so fast with it. Like i couldn't tell you where things are but my hands just knida know what gestures to do to get what I want to do done.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 21:00
|
|
|
Kanine posted:ive always used 3ds max and im poking around with learning maya and honestly i kind of hate maya I have to use Maya occasionally for work, and even though I’m finally comfortable (enough) with it, I still find it to be the most unwieldy collection of hidden menus masquerading as a program I’ve ever seen. I’m glad I only need to use it for Arnold shader creation/test renders though. I can still do all my work in Blender then bring the assets in and do my shader work. Haven’t tried the BtoA addons yet though, it would be nice to stay in one DCC. And I guess now that Max has it included, I can potentially use that. But in the end, knowing Maya has already paid off in giving me more work opportunities, so I can’t complain too much.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 21:03
|
|
|
KinkyJohn posted:Well I guess I’m then looking for a video player that will accomodate scrubbing in a friendlier way. I know quicktime lets you scrub a bit more smoothly, I’m just wondering if theres a better recommendation http://zurbrigg.com/keyframe-mp Keyframe MP/pro, possibly? It's designed for scrubbing animation exports/playblasts to check up animations. And even supports RAM-caching and the pro version supports image sequences too. Plus looping/oscillating loops. I've used it a couple times before, but generally just to playback maya playblasts. (Why the gently caress did you guys add a playblast player in 2018, then remove it again with an update? I hope they'll get it back in soon. )
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 22:21
|
|
|
Does anyone have a good resource on trying to model a simple skull in Maya? I'm trying to learn it as part of a unity pipeline at work (new incubator initiative) and I wanted to copy a scene from an image I found online and make it into a small unity scene to learn some scripting. However I can't find a drat thing relating to it. Best I can find are a few old head modeling videos with terrible direction. (I'm extremely frustrated at this since I can't do it and can't find anything to help me do it)
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 22:26
|
|
|
Use the Mudbox tools that are now in Maya to sculpt it if you don't have access to ZBrush. Start with a cube, subdivide it a ton, go to town getting the skull shape you want (Don't be afraid to use more than 1 mesh) and then retopo/UV it with Maya's tools. This video (quickly) goes through what I just described (minus the retopo/UV part, you'll have to figure that out in other videos): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6scw03J8csI Also Use reference. I've been sculpting characters and stuff for almost 10 years now at least and I still use reference. ceebee fucked around with this message at 01:43 on Sep 6, 2018 |
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 01:35
|
|
|
Hi folks, does anyone work from 3D-Coat to C4D? My model looks OK in 3d-Coat, but I'm struggling to achieve the same glossiness, specularity, normal look. Maybe I just have a lovely light setup in C4D? I've just used HDRI because this is going to be used in a short film exterior scene and I'm guessing that'll be the desired result. So yeah any tips on 3D-Coat to C4D workflow? Should I be looking at using something like Redshift? Disclaimer I normally just make stylised game models . 
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 17:48
|
|
|
I wish it wasnt against the rules to post cv's I receive in here because I just got one which is next-level. Colins bear would be a significant improvement. Hundreds of projects on the website to the same standard, a 15 page cv which goes into excruciating detail for everything he's ever touched - which in some cases is 6, 1 month long jobs spread over the course of a year. "very strong knowledge... high attention to detail...a strong sense of lighting...Expert...I'm very skillful...I'm a mastermind" all in a single paragraph. It feels like a very elaborate joke.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 20:26
|
|
|
ceebee posted:Also Use reference. I've been sculpting characters and stuff for almost 10 years now at least and I still use reference. I've been building an anatomically accurate skull bone by bone, one of the problems I actually ran into was finding good reference. I eventually had to resort to going into the lab and pulling out real skulls. The problem with doing the skull with high level of accuracy is that there is quite a large amount of variation from person to person in the relative sizes of the individual bones, so your reference for different planes has to all be from the same skull. Otherwise you can end up pulling your hair out trying to get all the different views reconciled. There's at least one skull on Sketchfab where it's obvious the person ran into the same problem, and while it looks good overall there's a region which is totally distorted and just wrong, like they got to the end and realized the proportions were all wrong, couldn't figure out how to fix it, and then just left it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 23:26
|
|
|
cubicle gangster posted:I wish it wasnt against the rules to post cv's I receive in here because I just got one which is next-level. Don't dox me, bro
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 23:47
|
|
Listerine posted:I've been building an anatomically accurate skull bone by bone, one of the problems I actually ran into was finding good reference. I eventually had to resort to going into the lab and pulling out real skulls. The problem with doing the skull with high level of accuracy is that there is quite a large amount of variation from person to person in the relative sizes of the individual bones, so your reference for different planes has to all be from the same skull. Otherwise you can end up pulling your hair out trying to get all the different views reconciled. Yeah this is true, and is why I have an entire book on skull differences  You typically just have to make good judgement, if I was making a scientific recreation I would definitely only use one skull for reference (and most likely photogrammetry it up anyways)
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2018 01:14
|
|
|
ceebee posted:Yeah this is true, and is why I have an entire book on skull differences I would love to know what that book is. ceebee posted:You typically just have to make good judgement, if I was making a scientific recreation I would definitely only use one skull for reference (and most likely photogrammetry it up anyways) I had started from atlases since I need to make each bone separately, but the bones weren't fitting together where they should. Using only one skull is optimal- it would definitely get you something that is accurate- but unfortunately it turned out we have pretty rigid rules about photographing our specimens so I had to rule out photogrammetry. Plus, all of our skulls are incomplete, after decades of use there are chips and breaks. What I ended up doing was surveying as many skulls as I could and then making sure in the model I was building the surfaces where bones were contacting each other were at the correct locations. My model ends up not being a copy of a real skull, but it's not breaking any anatomical rules- all the surfaces are in appropriate relationships, all the spaces are in the right places. I'm sure that there are probably small areas that are slightly wrong- and since I'm also 3D printing I skipped modeling the air cells of the ethmoid sinus- but it's the closest I've seen outside of MRI reconstructions which have their own problems. I'm doing the heart now and that sucks since it's muscle, so all my cadaver references are in slightly different positions and it's turning out to be really tricky to get all the components in the right positions/orientations/thicknesses. At least with bones you can be confident that was how it was in life.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2018 01:52
|
|
|
Figured out my 3D-Coat to C4D issue btw, you need to delete the specularity layers under reflectance and create a new GGX layer, then load your roughness and reflectance textures. Not a great render but's down to my inexperience.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
If you use more than one video card in a machine, in order to take advantage of all the GPUs for something like Redshift, do all the cards have to be the same model? I was thinking of upgrading to a 1080 Ti since the prices have dropped and was wondering if I could just leave both cards in- my current card is a GTX 780.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2018 07:45
|
|
|
I’m not sure about Redshift but the way it works for Fstorm is that you can have mismatched videocards. However, if you want them both to be rendering your scene the video ram usage is limited by the card with the lower amount of ram. People with Fstorm with mismatched cards generally assign the lower v ram card to handling the UI so it’s still responsive when rendering and then have the other more powerful card only handling rendering.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2018 15:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 22:56 |
|
|
For about a year, I used an nVidia GTX 1070 and Radeon Pro Duo concurrently. Tried a few different setups; one with the pro duo outputting to one monitor and the 1070 to another, and one with only the 1070 being hooked up to screens. My main workflow for it was having the GTX push my screens and the Pro Duo render, so I could continue working while I was rendering. Overnight though, I’d set both cards to render. Like it was said, the limitation is with the card with the lowest memory. So if I was using both, I’d be stuck on scenes using less than ~6gb. But, since the RPD is a dual card, when I’d have that and the GTX rendering it would be 3 tiles at a time, so I could get some fast speeds. Note that this required some extra setup to do in Blender - I had to enable debug mode so I could select both cards at once. It worked incredibly up until about 5 months ago - one of the windows feature updates seems to have broken the ability to use nVidia and AMD drivers at the same time, and I was getting constant bluescreens. Will probably try it again soon though, as maybe it’ll work again. So as that shows, you don’t need to have the same card, you can even switch brands! But, I wouldn’t recommend it. Ideally, stick with one or the other.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2018 16:03
|
|