Re: Thoughts from Joe on Lux and Indigo renderers

> Joe Crawford wrote:
>> I wanted to pitched in regarding the Lux renderer that is being
>> discussed, and the non-free Indigo renderer.
>>
>> I think its a very promising renderer.  It has a lot of active
>> development, and is already very useful.  I've used it a fair amount.
>> It renders over the network add gives great results pretty easily.
>>
>> Its been made to work with Blender through a python script, which
>> really isn't all that complicated.  It just has to understand all the
>> available material, lighting and rendering options. I think for
>> geometry it just spits out polygons for Lux.
>>
>> Lux has also proven useful to teach students about realistic
>> rendering, and since its free, I can give the students the software
>> they need to learn with!
>>
>> So....    Go Lux!  I'm really happy that some free software has come
>> in to fill that high end rendering void.
>
> As it happens, Daniel and I were already getting to a decision-point
> with Indigo ... in-general, I found the documentation on materials to be
> pretty lousy, and it wasn't clear how to "map" the Indigo materials into
> the K-3D pipeline.  So, with a little arm-twisting, Daniel agreed to
> look at LuxRender.  I'm just starting a new LuxRender module, so in a
> couple of days we should be up-and-running.
>