Why is Corona Blender exporter developed by community, not by us

[beep_1]

@MannaTheBerserk

Octane plugin is open source, that’s why you get it working, but Octane Standalone, which is of course independent from your software, is not. That’s why you get the plugin working (by the way, it doesn’t work if you don’t have the standalone).

I am pretty sure that the others, Indigo and Thea, have similar properties (either the plugin is open source, or something combined like Octane).

So there you have it.

Blender GPL license is your handbrake here.

Well, the Otoy’s Blender version is open source. The Octane engine is not Open Source as it is sold as separate Server application that connects to that special version of Blender.
So there is possibility to use a commercial render engine in Blender that works as a local server application that sends back and forth the information to Blender.

[claudio_gallego]

Hello there,

I read the reasons why Corona would not be available for Blender, and i can understand those ones.

This morning though i’ve found infos about BoxCutter, a Blender plugin that is not free.
So maybe the new Blender’s policy could allow 3rd party plugins to be paid ones ?
Maybe you do need to propose a free version that could be very simple, and a pay version with all advanced stuff in it ?

Pleas have a look at boxCutter for Blender 2.8, and if there is any chance to get Corona renderer for Blender, i’ll trun myself from 3dsmax to Blender, without any second doubd.

Regards.

Blender Modeling Add-ons: Box Cutter

[claudio_gallego]

Here you can see that some of the licenses are not free…
https://www.dropbox.com/s/6im7z6olbmzne2r/boxCutter.png?dl=0

#boxcutter 712 Release Ad

[Ondra_1]

The licensing limitation is usually circumvented by splitting the plugin into the free and commercial part. The free part just by itself is useless, and need the commercial part.

THat being said, the blender community is willing to develop the free part, so we are happy to supply the commercial part, to have blender rendering solution in form of exporter + standalone.

[sanekum]

@Ondra

The licensing limitation is usually circumvented by splitting the plugin into the free and commercial part. The free part just by itself is useless, and need the commercial part.

THat being said, the blender community is willing to develop the free part, so we are happy to supply the commercial part, to have blender rendering solution in form of exporter + standalone.

For now Blender+Standalone 3 is in very good shape thanks to Corona team and blanchg
Distance Map is not functuonal this is sad and couple other bugs

For the future we pray for the 2.80 and IPR render (and rewritten Standlaone I guess)

[claudio_gallego]

Exporte and standalone is a good start, but IR and materials within the host tool is a must…
I’ll wait.

[IvanMax33]

But what about cloud rendering , eg the code stays on corona side and blender guys just seting up their scenes. And of course it will cost money but it is what you get from choosing opensource application.

[kbbk]

And here we have Otoy with fully integrated commercial Octane renderer. You just need to download their blender build and use it along with licencing app – SO IT IS POSSIBLE – Dear Corona Team, why on earth you try to make so big trouble of that proving it cannot be done?

[Zorianpl]

Where is the right place to write that Blender users would like to have a new exporter to the new Standalone format?

[Scope]

Is this relevant also regarding the Standalone version?
(the last post)
https://forum.corona-renderer.com/ Which 3D soft to integrate into next? #msg175976

[maru]

@Zorian

Where is the right place to write that Blender users would like to have a new exporter to the new Standalone format?

Anywhere. Here is fine. But it doesn’t change anything, as we are already very much aware of it.

@Scope

Is this relevant also regarding the Standalone version?
(the last post)
https://forum.corona-renderer.com/ Which 3D soft to integrate into next? #msg175976

If you mean Corona Standalone in general - no, we are still actively developing it.
If you mean Corona Standalone for Blender - yes, that post was written as a reply to the previous post.
BUT, check out this blog post: 3D Rendering Blog for ArchDesign, ArchViz, Media & Entertainment | Chaos

The improved standalone format opens up the potential for it to be utilized with exporters from other platforms such as Blender (we are thinking about helping the development of the third-party open source Corona Exporter from Blender)

[Scope]

That’s pretty great news! But does the “exporter approach” mean that the functionality will be limited? Or does it all depend on the skills of the people who develop the exporter? I wish it could be something like Octane or Redshift (in development) for Blender. Is anyone actively working on it now though, or should we be looking for some talented people? I wish I knew anything about coding…

[Zorianpl]

I think that we need to look for someone by ourselves. But I think that will not succeed. I would love to have Corona in Blender, but well…

[claudio_gallego]

Hi there,

I’m surprised to see that some commercial render engine are available for Blender, and not Corona renderer :

I thought it was not going to Blender because of the open source system, that makes sense, but how do other do ?
Especially vRay, same company now.

[tom_grimes]

A pretty complex system; as best as I understand it, the render engine has to be a separate standalone item, then in Blender there is code to pass information back and forth out to this external version where the rendering etc. actually happens. This way the V-Ray core is not “inside” Blender, and only the code passing info back and forth has to end up open source. This level of complexity is why we have no plans to tackle Corona for Blender, it would simply consume too much time and slow down progress on the core functionality of Corona.

[claudio_gallego]

Ok i see, thank you Tom