Indigo Renderer Forum

Something strange came to my mind after I tried twinmotion since 2019, at that time it was crap, when I tried now I surprised to find the same Path tracer with denoiser that Indigo has, If anyone here in the forum tried twinmotion or unreal engine with Path tracer they will feel what I'm talking about, the look of the render and output is identical to what Indigo is offering, the strange thing that Indigo was active with updates till March 2021 then they disappear, Path tracer landed with Unreal engine in August 2021 (the same year after Indigo updates stopped) , is this intentional to stop the updates ?! .... is there any agreement to kill the software gradually after maybe a deal with Epic games, the way the founders deal with us (the clients who bought the software) when they stopped the updates suddenly without any clarification is emphasizing my doubts, I remember one sentence that Mr.Onosendai said that he was talking about their intention to make indigo open source to anyone who want to continue the development, I think if you decide to take this step you should return back the money to the people who recently purchased it and didn't take much benefit from it, I didn't bought it in 2020 to be shocked in 2021 of updates has been stopped completely then make only two minor updates 4.6.4 and 4.6.7 ... when the application is commercially based you don't have the right to make it open source unless you give the customers something in return.

Are you kidding right? have you compared one scene in each renderer?

Can you tell me is this done by Indigo or path tracer in Twinmotion?, You can't tell the difference, kindly download twinmotion 2023.1.2 and see how path tracer is working there, you will feel the same as indigo is running in front of you, regardless the difference in interface, rendering window is same

Let's first share both images, and then we can discuss them. I can't assess the image's quality by itself, as I'm unsure if any issues are due to the user or the software, what I can tell you is that while I haven't used TwinMotion extensively, especially its PT feature, based on my limited experience, I haven't come across anything particularly impressive with it, so I haven't had the motivation to compare it to anything else.

I did try comparing it to Octane once, and if Octane wasn't satisfactory back then, I wonder why a new rendering engine would be any better now.

I review this project made by the main moderator forum Oscar J, which received the behance award (even 2 years after its release), and every time these amazing renderings evoke more emotions and impressions (physical correction of the glass, a unique light scattering algorithm and the high taste of the author)

https://www.behance.net/gallery/1172808 ... -MA-Thesis



Does twinmotion give a similar feeling from the perception of the render? for me personally, no, TM reminds me of the classic architectural works of vray 3ds max from 2012, a simple commercial streaming format for stamping images, where the key advantage is speed on the stream. I don't think this is about art. I don’t know what you saw there “patch tracing” from Indigo, from the perception it’s a completely different engine. the shadows seem to float in the air.


The indigo renderer itself is quite a complex and at the same time simple engine, this is its charm, it’s like a construction set.


Yes, people don’t have free time to delve into these nuances. for example, I just discovered yesterday while studying forum threads from 10 years ago that weight map painting can affect the display of some shader materials (there is no information about this in the official manual) that from softimage > maya crease and freeze > blender > indigo it turns out more correct smooth subd geometry with "binormals and tangles data" available, and without this option directly exporting geometry from blender 2.8+ I could get very muddy shadows on the creases, which makes me think there's something wrong with the indigo engine.

or for example if there is an unevenness on the metal surface and the normal vertices are too long and the Subdivision Surface modifier is not applied + its name is not renamed! (why is it so difficult) and it is not correct (relative to the space and scale of the entire scene) to scale the axis, then in indigo I get a ribbed, rough, hard, sloppy surface. An alternative solution to this bug is to open the IMPmatdb scene from the forum and use F3 > pass the object data to replace the geometry with the transfer of modifiers, and only then everything will be ok. I imagine if a new user tried to get to know indigo from scratch, they would be shocked and misunderstand "where I ended up"

Then it turns out that the indigo engine supports hidden parameters for setting the light intensity hdri + sun when studying old .igm 3.x with notepad++ .igm scenes, and there are no checkmarks about this anywhere in the engine itself... for me, of course, the question is for what and for what purposes this is hidden from users, probably "natural selection"


Right now I’m studying a video about twin motion, well, perhaps the trick with interactive editors and quick placement of objects is of course 2 heads higher and more convenient than editing .igm through a notepad like in the era of the 90s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyjifEilI9A but my guess is that by integrating these options into the indigo engine, bugs will appear elsewhere, and the more complex and sophisticated the system, the higher the overall load and damage to stability... everything is interconnected, you always sacrifice something until you find your golden balance that you need specifically for your goals


about the refund it was probably a joke... what is written in the user agreement? Even if Epic bought out Indigo, you would have to blame large corporations for this, which devalued the market by dumping it, paying off due to the number of users. The same company autodesk ruined such a wonderful product as softimage xsi, some functions from it are only now appearing in 3D packages like Cinema 4D! all these parasites with long money are strangling promising projects, deliberately releasing buggy products so that you depend on them and constantly pay for a subscription.

Always nice to still see some action here

To me, the render does not look at all like Indigo - notice the interior of the cars, it seems like through the glass just the outlines of the 3D objects inside the cars become visible. That does not look like physics-based materials, or physics-based rendering, more like a trick or shortcut to save on rendering budget.

I really wish somebody bought this nice engine though, just so that it doesn't get forgotten completely.

How long you think this site will kept online?

Any other news about Glare, Indigo, Chaotica, Substrata? At least Ono seems to still be working on Winter: https://github.com/glaretechnologies/winter, and he does seem busy with other glare stuff: https://github.com/glaretechnologies/gl ... Ono-Sendai
Blog seems to be dead also: https://www.forwardscattering.org/

Hey Nick, how are you? Everythink ok?

Cheers from Germany!
Oliver

About OP, I can only concur on lack of updates and bugfixes, especially on side of plugins... anyways.
What's origin of UE's Path tracer? I've read somewhere (UE's Discord or Forums) it was work of former Maxwell~Render developer (?).
Otherwise, I find this UE's PT somewhat 'far' from Indigo's or even LuxCore's engine. Closer to Octane's maybe...

I know Nothing

The fate of Glare Technologies, Indigo, and other related projects remains uncertain. It's important to stay updated on any official announcements or developments from the developers to get a clearer picture of the future.