Jump to content

Cycles for C4D


Recommended Posts

So, I saw that on my imac at home it was user error on my part. It started to work - I simply just had to make the "size" in the live viewer somewhere below 50% otherwise it was extremely slow. It's still pretty slow on the cpu even then. It's strange though - I really do not have any issues with speed when I use cycles in Blender. If I set Blender's viewport to render - it's pretty darn fast. I still haven't delved to deep into that issue though so again - could be user error...

Regardless, I started using the demo at the office on a GPU box. And it's WAY faster obviously on the GPU's. 3x980ti's and it's pretty nice. I feel whoever wrote above though that it doesn't seem AS fast as Octane is right. But there are some major plus's on Cycles side.

My quick take between pro/cons between octane / cycles

Cycles Pros:

-Way better node editor - (easily my favorite thing about this.)

-More malleable shaders - (again attributes to node graph.)

-Attribute node - (can access a LOT from selection tags / vertex tags you name it really.)

-Easier to art direct for non-photo real looks.


Cycles Cons:

-Seemingly not as fast. (I can't be sure about that but I'm pretty sure that's true and it feels true.)

-No camera imager like in octane. (I kinda find the camera imager in octane slightly gimmicky, but it does help to have it sometimes.)

-Render quality / photo realism isn't as strong as octane. (kinda the bread and butter of octane imo... you can't really cheat it)

-Not as artist friendly - (not really for the person who's not an advanced user)

- Can't really see what my graphic cards are doing (I love the priority settings in octane and information displayed to see what my cards are really doing - that's a big one for me)


There's a lot more to cycles i have yet to learn... still in a bit of a mystery about light path node but that seems like a powerful one. I'm actually really split down the middle with this though. I really enjoy using the nodes in cycles way more. The results are predictable too. But there are some things with Octane I really miss too. I really dunno which I'm going to buy for home / future freelance work.... PROBABLY BOTH.

lord help me.

Link to post
  • Replies 149
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Been playing around with the Cycles4D demo on my 2013 MacPro. Since I have the big D700 cards with 6 GB each, I wanted to see if Cycles would do anything for me. Seems like these cards are supported. One positive. But like @docphibs said, this system is not for the casual user. I'm not a casual C4D user, but this renderer is pretty deep like the other bigger engines.

I was hoping there was some presets like the Physical Renderer just to get started with. High, Medium and Low. I opened the Bathroom scene, switched it to use both GPUs and hit render to picture viewer. Not fast at all. I then read here to turn off the Progressive Refine which sped things up tremendously.  Way faster, but low quality. See Render1.jpg attached. 2 min. 15 sec. I then moved the Samples up to 16. That's Render2.jpg attached. 8 min. 55 sec. Wow, that's a huge leap in render time for something that still isn't usable. 

I know there are a ton of settings and my Mac is not going to be the fastest, but I can't imagine it's this slow even with a tiny 600x600 output.

Can anyone shed some light on some settings that would produce at least basic production-level images for video?

I also read in one of the help pages that when rendering to the Picture Viewer, it will switch to the CPU instead of the GPU? Is this correct? If so, then what's the point if I can't use the GPU output?

Like I said, I haven't dug too deep at all, so I'm not slamming the plug-in, but I'm trying to see what it can do.


Oh I almost forgot, I think the watermark in the demo is excessive. It's hard to really see the details with so many logos interfering. Maybe fewer white logos and connect them with hairlines? Just a suggestion.


Render1.jpg    Render2.jpg

Link to post

Even though I say it's not for the casual user... that's not necessarily a bad thing either. I merely wrote that in as a "con" simply for those who aren't the advanced users. I absolutely love how malleable it is and that it is complex. It's a "pro" for me but probably a "con" for some.

Link to post

Yeah, I'm with you on that. Since I'm new to Cycles, it's just not easy to do any quick testing. If I open a MAXON sample scene and hit render, they set it up to show what it can do. That was my point.

Link to post
2 minutes ago, BigAl3D said:

Yeah, I'm with you on that. Since I'm new to Cycles, it's just not easy to do any quick testing. If I open a MAXON sample scene and hit render, they set it up to show what it can do. That was my point.

Oh yea I totally get that ;)

You simply made me aware that I actually contradicted myself where it's actually a good thing that cycles is for more "pro" users.


... see what i did there? (pun intended)

Link to post

In my experiments so far I've had a hard time finding a good balance between speed and quality (2013 Mac Pro also). Basically anything even sort of fast, turns out quite grainy and doesn't really refine much if you let it go for a couple minutes. Admittedly I still have much to learn about the settings but I haven't had time to dig through the video manuals and only partially through the main manual. I have to go back and check the site but I think the only Cycles downloads are scene files, not render presets. If so, I agree with the earlier comment. Even a Slow / High, Medium / Medium, Fast / Low type setup would be good. Entirely possibly I'm missing it somewhere though.

Link to post
4 hours ago, BigAl3D said:

ee Render1.jpg attached. 2 min. 15 sec. I then moved the Samples up to 16. That's Render2.jpg attached. 8 min. 55 sec. Wow, that's a huge leap in render time for something that still isn't usable. 

is not both too slow ?!

I can get much faster results with c4d and the physical renderer and the semi -unbiased technique  on a core i5 dual machine 

Link to post
3 hours ago, BigAl3D said:

@docphibs, since you have experience with Blender's Cycles anyway, any suggestions for a basic setup to get a clean render out of Cycles that won't take an hour to render?

I'm really not that experienced either! haha

there's been links posted in this forum that I watched like this link here - 


there are a couple other links posted that helped a lot. The global settings really pretty simple to me. You just have to test / optimize per scene. My results have been grainy too. But not toooo bad like the two images you posted. I honestly don't know how good those cards in the trashcans really are for this...


3x980tis are doing pretty well with it. I'll share some of my renders tomorrow and screen cap my render settings.

Link to post


9mins 32 seconds with 3x980 ti's 1920x1080

it's using volume scatter on the platonics, sss on the blue dude... i was testing how to mix completey different materials on the ... purple... orange... whatever you wanna call that. and i just chucked a guy way in the bg to see how the DOF was working. There's also displacement happening on the ground plane.

I hit a snag early on messing with displacement... you have to be mindful of the subdivision rate (pixel) in global settings. It probably maxed out the vram on my cards and it would never render. It was set way too high by default. So I set that to 4. In the live viewer you see it's set by default to 8. (obviously the higher the less detail/faster render time)

I've been messing with this file for a bit so I would still say it's not optimized. It could be faster. I just have my settings a little cranked just to make sure I had enough transparency depth levels and ray bounces to play with whatever I needed to play with.


Link to post

Thanks for that post Doc. I took your specs and put them into the Bathroom scene. Using my dual FirePros, I got a time of 5:28. After tweaking and doing many renders, I came up with settings that seem to be a good mix of quality and speed (see attached). 

My other question is, if GPUs are so fast, why aren't the used as CPUs? Right?


Best Quality vs Time for Me .jpg

Link to post

One other thing I'll mention, when rendering with Cycles on my MacPro, my computer is pretty useless. It really hogs all the resources. Working while I'm rendering won't work, unless there are some parameters to prevent this from happening.

Link to post


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Create New...