I downloaded their SDK and some example files from here: https://support.solidangle.com/display/ARP/.ass+File+Examples
Pretty fast. 
What I find interesting is that arnold gets cleaner results in indirectly lit areas while using the same amount of samples. Would something like this https://www.solidangle.com/research/egsr2013_spherical_rectangle.pdf help? Or does cycles already use it?
cdog: We donât use this paper yet, but we could implement it.
We already have this on our ToDo actually: http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:2.6/Source/Render/Cycles/ToDo
âSpherical triangle/quad light samplingâ.
Youâre being a little unfair in this request. A company that releases software as âkick .assâ is going to have its naming discussed, itâs a valid topic.
Iâd urge people to consider that the naming of software is part of its interface, and will play a part in shaping the expectations of new users. âMaxon Cinema 4Dâ had a very positive effect on me when I started in CGI, for instance. âMayaâ sounds rather excellent too, with connotations of CGI effects in some Indiana Jones caper. âLightwaveâ, perfect. âMaxâ just as good. âAutoCADâ, could hardly be better.
In short, it matters. âKick .assâ sounds like it was decided on by geeky teenagers who are into âgroovy stuff or, like, whateverâ.
No⌠no it doesnt matter. It might seem like it matters to those who want to get worked up over something, but no it doesnt matter. Theres a list of box office movies that have used Arnold and the studios that have licensed it that confirm that. A tool is a tool, as artist its your responsibility to focus on the tool, not the name. Sometimes people name their kids funny things, should an employer not hire them based on their name? If not then be a man and do the same thing with the software involved.
I have had my say, feel free to continue on with that line of thought without me⌠just remember, its far more juvenile to get worked up about software and such based on its name rather than what it does and has done.
The concerns of important industry figures like AceDragon and RayTungsteen must be considered when deciding the name of something. Can we really trust the future of computer-animated robots and monsters to lie in the hands of this person? Rendering is serious business and he doesnât look like he takes serious people serious.
Iâm sure SolidAngle will make it a top priority of having a Blender exporter ready, seeing that Blender is a community of high morals and staunch professionalism. They really must be anxious to hear many more of these valuable opinions!
Blender will be the last softwhere.
After Maya⌠they will make Houdini, then Max or Modo or cinema 4D after that maybe blender.
Blender to Arnold Exporter > http://rudycortes.com/2011/08/btoa-blender-to-arnold/
Off Topic:
Prejudice towards use of words have no place here.
Word is just a word until you make a problem out of it. Please constrain yourself from being narrow minded.
It is plain prejudice.
Some words are offensive in one language & at the same time nothing special in other.
ie.
1
Fukubi = is a surname in Japan
Fuku bi = means: âI wanna f*ck.â in Slovenian
2
Slave = Man of word, honor⌠in Slavic Languages
Slave, Sklave = servant, man without rights⌠in Germanic, Romanic Languages
⌠and are many more.
It is just a state of mind.
Please, evolve. Understand yourself.
Folks⌠while the naming of files is somewhat relevant to this thread, it certainly has had no bearing on the success or quality of this renderer⌠or the long-standing desire of artists to purchase it (âa rose by any other nameâ and all that).
So, allow me to moderate here. There are some people who might take issue with the naming of files as they pertain to Arnold. Most people donât. Voices have been heard. The discussion has been had. Letâs move on to discussing something more important and relevant about this tool.
Say buddy, thatâs a good idea. As long as all artistic tools have a âmildly profaneâ technical name, the rest of us donât have to deal with people who think that butts are offensive.
CHALLENGINâ AUTHORITY, AW YEAH
Rudyâs BtoA has been dead for a loooong time. But without revealing too much, a couple of people are working on unofficial support for Blender already. Hopefully theyâll have something to show soon.
Does anyone have a current viable Blender to Arnold work-flow solution? If I knew I could use Arnold with Blender I definitely would make a purchase.
I donât think there are viable solutions. You can export to maya and then set the materials there, but it is not viable at all for real purposes.
So what, exactly, are the differences that would make you choose one renderer over another? Or just generally, Iâve only really used the renderers built into Cycles, and theyâre obviously different, but when it comes to different photorealistic renderers itâs hard for me to imagine what would make different systems competitive against one another. I can imagine ways they would be objectively better or worse (ie. render times, price), but itâs harder for me to imagine the sort of lateral differences that would make it meaningful to pick one or another.
Except, of course, that you can weed out the most prudish users if you use Arnold, but Iâll count that as an objective improvement.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B45n974fPoOpeVBvYUNFa3NuN0E/edit?usp=sharing
Thought Iâd throw this .ass file up for people with the trial to play with. Itâs the ten24 head with my Arnold Sum of Gaussians skin shader. Enjoy!
As far as a Blender-Arnold workflow, there really isnât one (yetâŚ). Arnold is so tightly integrated with the SItoA and MtoA plugins that itâs very difficult to create scenes any other way. The deep integration is one of the reasons it was only available for SoftImage for so long. They donât mess around with integration over at SA.
EDIT: It seems textures are missing. Hold tight while I figure out how to pack with it.
EDIT 2: Reuploaded. May only work with the kick.exe that comes with SItoA, so Iâll have to do some more research into how to get that working. Let me know if anyone has any issues with the new file.
It does, and thereâs unfortunately no obvious way to get the SDK download to recognize the definitions. The necessary .dlls are included in the free .xsiaddon trial, but I have no idea how to get to the files inside of it without a version of SoftImage installed.
Well for one thing every parameter is right under your mouse in one panel. Not a damn node in sight. Can you imagine how much faster that would be in a days production. Not to mention how intuitive it is. Indeed one of the selling points on their site seems to be users saying how easily their artist adapted to the interface. This link will take you to Vimeo where you can see the renderer in action.
Now in all fairness let me make one thing clear. I think Cycles is a fine render engine and getting better every day. My forum buddy @minoribus is turning out some outstanding work using Cycles. And, with a Titan card he is positioned to use Cycles to the max. But, the main thing is I hate a node based system. And, by node based I mean having to play in Nodesville for much of a setup. Sliders and value boxes are not only more intuitive for me but way faster. So yes Iâm biased in that respect. I believe this might have been your question but if not this is âThe Blender Forumâ where opinionated asses like me hold court. OPPS sorry about that dragon.