It looks like you're using an ad blocker! I really need the income to keep this site running.
If you enjoy BlenderNation and you think it’s a valuable resource to the Blender community, please take a moment to read how you can support BlenderNation.

Blender Internal renderer removed from 2.8

129

After 25 years, the Blender Internal renderer got removed from the 2.8 branch. This will help development, but I can't help but feel a little sad.

About Author

Bart Veldhuizen

I have a LONG history with Blender - I wrote some of the earliest Blender tutorials, worked for Not a Number and helped run the crowdfunding campaign that open sourced Blender (the first one on the internet!). I founded BlenderNation in 2006 and have been editing it every single day since then ;-) I also run the Blender Artists forum and I'm Head of Community at Sketchfab.

129 Comments

  1. I'm still one of the holdouts that uses Blender Internal most of the time as I usually don't need PBR. And for instructional purposes, which is my main use for Blender, I think it's better to use the legacy renderer for beginners and switch to Cycles later.

    Also, this is likely to break compatibility for files using Blender Internal. Has it stuck around long enough that it needs to go? Maybe.

    • There is still the option to use an older version of Blender... which I do all the time for certain things. Critical work can then be saved without BI materials and opened in 2.8 -- assuming of course there are issues with compatibility.

    • The new eevee render is making blender internal obsolete. It can do anything the internal can and better. You don't have to use pbr in eevee. (i personally think it's good practice anyway since it's more useful in almost any industry)

      Also I don't think the legacy material system is better for beginner's as it is very confusing to use. The node editor is way more intuitive, and the basic stuff can still be done from the side menu.
      e.g. you have a material output node. and you drop in a texture node, and connect the two and done.

      I think it's better to bite the bullet and just take the little time to remap your brain to the new system. Because in the end it's going to make your life easier then it's now.

      And yes it will break compatibility, but there is always the older version available for download.

      • The node editor is more intuitive? Hmm, not for me! I am the artistic type, I am not good with nodes - they are not my way of thinking! Sliders ... that would be more intuitive! You don't need all that technical background, just slide ... and you see the result at once! That is intuitive - from my point of view.
        Until now I have always avoided using Cycles. The Blender Internal was much more understandable for me. Much more accessible and easier to use, and also much faster. Okay, Evee is super fast, but Evee also works with nodes, just like cycles. I will have to retrain myself a lot now. And actually I don't like spending a lot of time there in that real. Yeah, personnaly I regret it a lot!
        But we have to move forward, I guess? Hopefully I will soon get used to it ...

        • The node editor is made for artists. otherwise you would be typing python code.. nodes are not at all technical. it's just as you would tink. you have a material node, you have a texture node, connect them up with a line.

          In the old system you have to know which bars have influence on what. because it's not clear. in the node editor you have exactly a visible representation on what influences what.

          But even besides that, you could just use the side bar like in blender internal. Click on new material, click on the little grey icon next to the color and select image texture from the menu.

          Don't confuse difficulty with difference. anything that is different from what you're used looks difficult at first. But you had to learn BI once, now it's time to modernize and learn the new system. I'm sure once you've put in as much time with the new system as you did with BI you'll look back and say to yourself, why didn't i switch sooner, this is so much easier.

          also if you can't bring yourself to move on, then just stick with the old. But art wise you're going to be left in the dust. at some point if you get better, you're going to realize you're not satisfied with what you make anymore, it just doesn't look good enough, doesn't look how you wanted. This is when you realize the old technology is holding you back, limiting your potential. Better to just get it over with and profit in the long term

        • The node editor is an industry standard today, it is in every major software and the reason for that is because it is easier to use while being more powerful. Of course someone can create an incredibly complex node material, the sky is the limit, but a lot of things are not possible with the none node based material editor.
          If people here give it a solid try I am sure their point of view will change.

          • @BIGPILOT Definitely not. Programs like Houdini 3D were using it for general procedural logic and shader tree programs like Mental Mill were around before Blender had the GLSL nodes. Nodes just are a common way to represent tree and graph datastructures where the evaluation of one items is dependent on other items - and you can represent that in a UI with modular blocks. For programmers, and engineers who work a lot with diagrams (like UML or SysML), I don't really think it's something that has to be seen and known about ahead of time to get the idea for - it's the logical/obvious answer for a UI that needs unlimited configurability.

        • I was trying to explain how to create a leaf texture with transparency in Cycles. Couldn't for the life of me figure out the correct way to wire the nodes.

          • So why not just use principal bsdf shader? It does already all the work of combining transparent and diffuse shaders?

          • When I first saw nodes I was certainly a little dubious. One tutorial and a few sessions and I had it down pat. It’s really not that difficult.

            Principled shader is basically the one stop shop, just like BI materials panel.

            But if you want to explain it:
            Create: Diffuse shader, transparent shader, mix shader and image texture. Diffuse and transparent into the mix shader, and transparency texture into factor. Granted it’s not as simple as BI, but way more powerful.

            A solution that has been propose do is a hater basic materials panel, so you could work in there instead of node editor.

      • TheOuterLinux on

        The mode editor is more intuitive? What?! I've been using Blender since 2.3 and I refuse to touch the node editor. If I need something to have more color or contrast or whatever, I just shrug and use GIMP or DigiKam and maybe work in layers if I have to. You may have more control with the node editor, but it's definitely not easier. It's like if Blender required JACK (as in one of Linux's audio servers) to work. Young developers need to stop ignoring perspectives and venture out of their coworker niche to get a better understanding of how the rest of us prefer to do things. If they took a vote, the material editor as we know it would stay. If you'll notice, people seem to only be in favor for this if it "makes the work easier for the developers," which makes me doubt how genuine those comments are. What about the users? Don't we get a say? Their target audience is clearly no longer the average person, which was what got me into it to begin with. Can you see students using the node editor in a public K-12 school? Not everyone can do the amazing things that are show-cased on this site, but I guess if that's the targeted group, it makes the project look better, which is the primary motivation going on here.

        • If you've refused to use it out of principle, then you'll never learn it, and you'll never experience how handy it is. And yes i see students using the node editor. it's the stuck-to-the-old guys that dislike change that are the ones complaining.

          And yes you do get a say, it's an open-source project. But you are wrong about saying that most will want to make it stay. Most people in the community actually quite like it. (besides some UI improvements that always can be suggested)

          also the target audience for blender was never just the "average person" It has always been a complicated program, if you want average, there is sketchup and windows 3d studio.

          Also blender 2.8 will come with a blender 101 version for all the people who need it a little more layed-out, and want less features

          • I agree with MRTHERICH. Seriously . . . the expansiveness of using node-based systems far exceeds any sliders IMO. And I absolutely see students doing circles around us old guys with nodes. Only speaking from my experience but the caterpillar of BI has long been ready to emerge as a new and fresh butterfly with something such as EEVEE. I really encourage you to spend some time to learn how the node system works. Don't create a new project to do this. Use an existing (simple) one. That way you can focus on understanding the nodes. They really will work for you. Plus . . . you don't have to learn all the intricacies of every node to start getting amazing results. I don't know all their power even but we in the community help each other. We will be with you every step of the way.

        • dude, it's really not that difficult. I was afraid too. Still with BI you had to use the material panel AND the texture panel. With cycles you only have to use the material panel. If you just really want to fine tune the material then you have to open the node editor.

      • Brian Lockett on

        "The new eevee render is making blender internal obsolete."

        Well, no, no really. EEVEE is a new option (and more of us are preferring it), but Blender Internal still sees things like easier use of Freestyle and (in some ways) it's still a more straightforward set-up process than EEVEE.

        Not griping here. I just don't see the point in "obsoletism" all the time. EEVEE is simply a newer option, with its own great share of perks.

        I personally love EEVEE, and it'll probably become my second turn-to (after Cycles), but I'll keep a copy of Blender 2.79b around, anyways. ;)

        Believe it or not, I still find handy uses for Blender Internal. I myself still use it for fast pre-viz and some quick paintovers in concept art. There are some Blender add-ons I use that still rely on (or work better with) BI. It's fast, easy setup, and, sometimes, you don't need a fire hose to kill a fly.

        Oh, and I use about seven different programs that rely on nodes (World Machine, Substance, Houdini Indie, UE4--so many nodes!).

        Sometimes--just sometimes--the artist side of my brain (right-brain) just prefers to not deal with the logical (left-brain) nature of nodes. ;)

        But I do welcome the EEVEE era, and I don't blame Blender Foundation for this long-anticipated move.

        • All those things you just described you still use BI for, eevee will do, and probably better. hence, it makes it obsolete... suure somethings become 3 clicks instead of 2 and some become 2 instead of 3. But that doesn't take away that eevee will take over any task that BI (and viewport opengl) had before this. (except leaving some more advanced heavy calculated stuff to cycles)

          • Brian Lockett on

            I didn't ignore what EEVEE offers. I know what it offers.

            But you've ignored my point about nodes being absolutely everywhere in DCC tools--and how that's sometimes not the most artist-friendly way. That's still a valid point. A trade-off worth noting.

            In any case, I wish you hadn't acted like I didn't state my last sentence. I didn't knock EEVEE or deny its offerings. I welcome it.

            Be careful in trying to alter people's opinions. I welcome opinions, but there's nothing's worse than an overzealous evangelist.

  2. I am still curious if there is a way to replicate the cone line effect from BI in Cycles (now perhaps in Eevee). Obviously, Eevee is now going to have some rather large shoes to fill, though from what I've read and seen - it's not really a final rendering solution anyway... I would love to see that speedy OpenGL rendering option enhanced with a build-in rendered-mode view that Eevee offers. But I am also hoping Eevee brings out features that BI had that may have been more technical that weren't as readily achievable with Cycles. EeVee - it's up to you now!

  3. DimitrisChristou on

    Not sure how I feel about it too. Still use BI and it's pretty good for quick non-photorealistic renders.

      • Brian Lockett on

        Maybe you're over-evangelizing EEVEE just a bit? lol

        I don't think anyone so far is condemning or denying what EEVEE can do, or protesting this move. Just personal sentiments, so far.

        If someone still has their own personal uses/preferences for Blender Internal, that's fine, right? ;)

        Besides, the fuller potential of EEVEE is how it's largely node-based. I like nodes (sometimes, but I do realize that not everyone's wired for nodes (pun intended).

      • @MRTHERICH are you saying eevee will be faster than BI... ** on the same hardware **?

        That could be difficult, as eevee primary scope seems to be realtime rendering... have you any comparison pages to share?

        I know 2.79b will still be around but, eg, new Grease Pencil features will require 2.8+... users needing BI and new features will need to switch back and forth between 2.79b and new releases...

  4. Rip, BI!

    You was our father, brother and friend.

    I hope you are in better place, where there is no fireflies and no need in samples...
    When every render engine got best hardware...
    Where there is no stupid users that don't know what they are doing with you and pressing F12 all the time...

    We will miss you!

  5. I am just very curious about how the old files using the texture stacks will be converted, and to what texture system in EVEE (node or still texture stack)? Will my Blinn/Phong materials will get converted to PBR? And what amount of re-coding my addons will require to export all this to a custom run-time format.

  6. Will eevee ever be able to do accurate reflections and retractions like blender internal? The screen space reflections look nice but get artifacts as object move in and out of view.

    • Blender Internal was a weird hacky mix of raytracing and rastarized rendering (the way game engines do it) which meant that BI is not fast enough for real-time, but not accurate enough for photorealism.

      Accurate reflections are really, really expensive to calculate. If you watch the UE4 reflection demo of this year you can see they are pioneering, with creating real-time reflections.

      With eevee the focus is rendering speed (real-time), and accurate reflections is one of the first sacrifices they made to make that happen.

      So the two main render engines split BI options to give the best one for each situation: you want photorealism, use cycles, but sacrifice real-time. You want real-time use eevee. Maybe somewhere in the future, when pc's get even more beefy we get some raytracing back in eevee, like in the UE4 demo. Who knows

  7. i really do not understand the point of removing blender internal. It was simple and efficient. This type of rendering is still used widely not only in other 3d programs but its still used in games. Who cares that it was unrealistic? Do you complaint for zbrush viewport? Its almost same.

    • Don't worry, 2.8 gets something better in return: eevee. this engine is based on the newest game engine technologies, so it's exactly what you ever wanted. this is why it's removed.

    • It was stated in the article. It was old code and everything new had to be adapted to fit outdated code. If it was easy to just have hanging around in Blender, they probably would have. Lots of other outdated features hang around a long time. But it was taking away resources from the future of Blender, so I'm all for it. I think Eevee will be soon able to do everything internal could do, and way faster. And, as always, anyone can stay at 2.79b for as long as they like.

  8. Glad to see it go! I switched to Cycles as soon as I could, and on the few occasions over the years I found myself accidentally back in BI mode, I couldn't believe how arcane and complex all the material settings were. Cycles and the Principled BSDF make so much more sense.

    • haha same here. Ever since Cycles came out I stopped using the Internal. The only thing I use internal for is fast volumetrics rendering, but Eevee appears to head in the right direction on that.

    • If you are mainly aiming at realistic workflow, then BI may look complex. But when you work in non-photoreal, BI is very close to the workflow in any raster painting software. If you don't paint or draw in Blender, BI's strength might not be clear to you. I'm not saying BI is good, it is very broken and never been fixed.

      Add an anime character with painted background in BI and animate a little, you can get anime living in the viewport. BI is already realtime (60fps).

      • Of course I know it is in development. Despite this I use 2.8 in production. I use a middle february version - it is the only one usable for me. I'm just wonder if lack of animation is about all platforms or just Mac.

  9. Isn't 2.79 going to be archived for some time to come? Couldn't users still use both 2.79 and 2.80 until Eevee (or some other work around) completely obsoletes every lingering need (or want) of BI? I've even thought having an old Blender 2.79 installer saved as a backup somewhere would come in handy if I ever lost access to the internet (like while moving). I'd bet that that Eevee will have a lot more functionality that what has been seen so far in the beta builds of 2.8.

    • 2.79 will always be there for anyone, well at least in the foreseeable future you can actually download blender from decades back if you want. they always keep the versions available for download. (i think they will stop featuring it prominently in the download section once 2.8 its field tested and battlehardend

    • Yep, every Blender version back to something like 1.79 is availble. I joined the Blender community at 2.23. I have it installed on my computer just for nostalgia's sake.

  10. Just preserve an installer for 2.79 for those who cannot afford a brand new computing machine. The important thing is the result of what you are creating. Not the tech

  11. FatherOblivion on

    You never know with Open Source. Gnome2 was dead, and now it’s not.
    Someone will perhaps fork the old Blender render and release it as a add-on for blender.
    I hope they make baking better in Cycles.

    • An addon will porbably not be easy, they are changing core aspects of the code of blender that makes the BI incompatible from now on into the future. but well, old versions of blender always hang around so you can still use those...

      • FatherOblivion on

        I wont miss it, only for baking normal and displacement maps.
        Blender 2.79 is maybe a crossroad for a new Blender retro fork, who knows.
        I'm only saying:
        POV-Ray
        AmigaOS
        FreeDOS
        OS/2 Warp => ArcaOS
        Old games
        Vinyl
        Mandriva => OpenMandriva Lx..............

        "Jazz is not dead ... it just smells funny."
        -Frank Zappa-

  12. Each time, they make it heavier. By having the default scene (a cube, a light and a camera), the scene takes much time to do everything it needs. The internal renderer is more compatible with less powerful machines. By using Cycles / EVEE without a dedicated video card, it is no longer a software of light resources. They are becoming elitist.

    • This is an interesting point Juan - how will Eevee function without a GPU? I would guess it it relies on GLSL OpenGL stuff. But the new "clay mode" (sorry, I forgot what it's called) is essentially just a matcap view, which is where I expect to be spending a lot of time, since it is the most basic view...

      • Blender 2.8 will require either OpenGL 3.0 or 3.3 as a minumum (I can't remember which). So you are probably be going to want some sort of video card to get the most out of it. This means you might have some difficulty with cards older than about 8 years or with not so recent versions of MacOS.

    • I definitely disagree. The minimum requirements to work in Blender are still very low. I still use Blender Cycles with a 7 year old computer as a backup at my house (when my main computer is rendering) in cycles. I haven't messed around as much in Eevee, but a little, and it seemed to work fine. If you feel that not supporting 10 year old hardware is elitist, I feel that your standards are quite different than the average person.

    • Yes you are right about the old BI to be better with old machines, but if your machine is old, it's not weird to say that you should also be limited to older versions of blender (mind you, older versions will not dissapear)

      Currently BI is holding progress in blender back. Progress meaning implementing newer, more advanced software, that utilizes the advancements made in hardware. Blender's requirements are still very low if you are just talking about cheaper gpus. a modern day intel or low end nvidia drive will be able to handle the basic features of eevee just fine.

      If your pc is already struggling with loading the default scene, then maybe it's just time to save up for a pc upgrade. Stop comparing blender to the past, compare it to the competition (max, maya etc) those programs need massive machines to run properly. Blender still runs from a USB stick, isn't that amazing?

      and if you can't or don't want to upgrade hardware for whatever reason, then just stick with the old versions. You can't expect get all the new features but stop upgrading hardware....

      • Brian Lockett on

        "Stop comparing blender to the past, compare it to the competition (max, maya etc) those programs need massive machines to run properly."

        Eh, about competition...

        I still think Blender needs to listen to more professional feedback, rather than being more directed "for the community" (which is nice, but not how industry-leading software generally prioritizes development.)

        Blender Internal may hold some things back, but it's not Blender's problem, regarding "competition."

    • I just download 2.8 and the EEEVEE race space ship by Alessandero Chiffi model last week.

      On my 16 GB i3 6157U Intel Iris 550 I can happily orbit around the model, with a bit of lag, completely acceptable for my way of modeling-still faster then waiting for a render of a comparable quality.

      Playing video's happens at 5.3 FPS.
      It wouldn't surprise me if the results get better over time, when EEVEEE/ 2.8 matures.

      Very happy with the results on this low end laptop, keeping in mind I don't need to play play video's at full FPS.

  13. Cycles and eevee could never replace BI, I render smoke sim in BI cause it is way faster, i can have 1000 sprite object with transparency to simulate smoke and it will render in 5 secondes, and will not even mention NPR and short animation where I can render high quality noiseless animation exponentially faster. but I guess we all have to stick to 2.78-ish as 2.79 has some bugs that did not work for me

    • so? this is exactly what eevee is going to be able to do exactly and probably faster than BI. not currently of course, because it's in development stage, but once it's done...

    • I tested Cycles for NPR and it renders 3 frames per second using GLSL and 0 noise classic cel shadder look

      (The following 4 points are for design purposes, not concentrating on photo realisim)

      There is only 4 problems from what I can see with Cycles for NPR

      (NPR doesn't just mean Manga style rendering lets not for get motion graphics a massive part of the industry that Blender seems to always fail at finding adopters for)

      1. Cast shadow colours can't be controled in viewport on a per object basis.
      2. Colour in GLSL mode is not the same as the render; significantly different. I think EEVEE has fixed this though not sure.
      3. The ability to choose which objects are lit and which objext aren't with a light.
      4. Draw order is a massive problem

      Again these are from what can see in a "Design Perspective" and focusing on feesability for TV shows and motion graphics.

      I haven't tested EEVEE yet, but I am sure rewriting the toon shadder to be "what you see is what you get" won't be hard.

      Let's also not forget Cycles can use OSL which is probably the direction Blender studios should be really considering if they want to stick to render farms.

      OSL has alot more developers adopting it now because of Autodesk adoption which means more materials.

      Does someone need to teach the community to write OSL Shaders?

      Anyone want to expand on this?

      Link to OSL:
      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Shading_Language

  14. Well, that pretty much solidifies that I will be running 2.79 for a long time, even if I have 2.8 running along side it at some point in the future when it doesn't crash by switching into edit mode.

    Aside from a few other reasons (still waiting on a proper sane wireframe mode for 2.8 and a way of quickly switching between wireframe/solid/rendered mode while modelling) the lack of displacement map baking for Cycles means I can't ditch Blender Internal completely. Why wasn't that ever ported from BI to Cycles?

    • If you look at one of the open stage talks of the blender conference, you can see that a guy made an more amazing wireframe mode. It will probably be added to 2.8 alongside clay and eevee as viewport option

  15. Brian Lockett on

    Thanks for everything, Blender Internal. You were a friend, in a strange software sort of way. (Though, I'll still keep Blender 2.79b around for quite a long while.) ;)

    (Oh, and thanks for everything, Blender Foundation.)

  16. It probably can't be helped. But there are features in Blender Internal which aren't possible in Cycles or Eevee yet. On top of the major backwards incompatibility in scripting, this will ensure a repeat of the Python 2.8/3 or Perl 6 syndrome.

  17. Ah Blender Internal. It's been a long journey. Anybody else remember that magical day when Ton casually added in raytracing, as if it was nothing? Must have been around version 1.9. I'm sure you remember, Bart.

    I've got quite a task ahead of me to pick up the new systems, as I've only really dabbled up to now. But it's true that the materials panel still works as a simple access point, plus the Principled Shader makes things easier to control (it's essentially a floating Materials Panel). So once Eevee is fully featured I can certainly see it replacing BI for my purposes at least.

  18. If Evee will give (as one of posibilities ) the same precision of rendering simple lights as BI its OK! Obviously as realtime renderer it will be "enough fast" :-)

  19. Well, as long as core changes are being made, how about bringing mouse button conventions into line with literally every other program ever written by anyone for any purpose? Ten years of use and it still feels awkward and ass-backwards to right-click for select.

  20. To be honest It is a little bit of a shame. Cycles is not fast enough and can't be optimized enough to even come close to the speeds of BI.

    cycles is missing a few important work arounds that BI had, ?

    Oh well guess EEVEE will be a solution to some degree.

    if it speeds up development then great, just focus on EEVEE and CYCLES,

  21. I started my Blender adventure with BI and it did serve me well. I understand Blender can no longer be as it was in the late 80s/90s. Still, a good compromise between nodes and sliders IS needed. If EVERYTHING is done with nodes, as, among others, Gleb wants it, even a relatively simple scene may be barely readable. We all know how complex and big a node tree can be. So, for the sake of clarity, don't turn everything upside down. Or make yet more powerful nodes.

    • If you want to use relatively simple material options (1 texture per material slot) then the current material editor (not the node editor ) will get the job done without being too complicated.
      If you want to get more involved I think requiring the node editor is a reasonable compromise. I also think that having a descent material library system will be of more value to users for which node editor is intimidating.

  22. on my PC with only GPU (intel HD400) on CPU i can't use EEVEE at all.
    few months ago i tested a prerelese of EEVEE and could'nt use EEVEE on my PC :(
    was it because of the ongoing development or is it in general not supporting the intel HD 400 GPU on CPU?
    so i have only the choice to use cycles or upgrade to a proper graphic card?

    • Eevee isn't presently working on my Intel HD 4000 system in Win 10, even with the latest Intel drivers installed. In Fedora Linux on this machine with the latest Mesa Eevee works with 8K images but has problems with 16K HDRI's. The devs are aware of Intel graphics problems and will hopefully fix them soon. Rendering with Eevee is impressively fast and quite realistic.

  23. I'm happy they finally did it. It means they won't have to worry about any bugs/issues with internal render and concentrate on 2.8/Eevee.

    But like most of you here, it sure brings back some good old memories

  24. Blender Render has been dead since Blender version 2.5. Many people hope that Eevee will be a replacement. But from what I see, there is no timeline or proposal to make Eevee with features of Blender Render, only talk. Talk is cheap. We from the Blender NPR group have been talking to the devs for so long (since Oct 2012). The result... nothing. Blender Institute and the core devs don't care about NPR. I would be very happy to be proven wrong.

    There are so few of us in the NPR community who truly understand how to build a good NPR render engine. Core devs, Talk to us please. You guys have been ignoring us more than 5 years. Don't repeat the same mistakes.

    • My personal opinion is when people name NPR in relation to blender, they specifically mean crappy BI renders with textures and stuff (toon/low poly) The thing is you can do all these things in both eevee en cycles and of course they won't look the same, but better.
      Both engines can do a lot of hacky stuff, if you combine with nodes and render layers. But i'm personally glad those ugly badly done BI and open gl viewport stuff is discouraged now.

    • On a side note: Blender is not owned buy the institute. Blender is owned by the community. The institute is not required to do any work on blender inf they don't want to. Their business is animation and they hire programmers to work on blender to improve the tools that they use.

      If you want a good NPR renderer, pay (or ask) some programmers to write one for you and hook it up to blenders system. The new 2.8 is going to have a very modular render manager. which means you can easily hook up or create lots of different rendering engines that you can just switch to with a click.

      The core devs don't care about NPR because their focus lies on the core code of blender. all the behind the scenes stuff, which is hugely important but not always noticeable. so they have priorities.

      But really, blender is no commercial software, which means there is no commercial company behind blender. The institute is nothing like Autodesk, where you buy software from and can expect customer service in return. The institute (soon to be called blender studios) is an animation studio that hires programmers to do work on blender, so can do anyone else.

      You want a feature? pay someone to make it for you, or make it yourself, that is the beauty of blender and open-source. Sadly if you can't program, and you don't have money to pay someone, then you're at the mercy of others, and all you can do is ask and wish.

  25. Lorenzo Gatti on

    Comprehensive documentation about how exactly Eevee features are going to replace BI features would serve both to help and reassure diehard BI user and as a reference for Eevee development; the abstract promises of feature parity and obsolescence made throughout this thread are credible, but not sufficient in practice.

    • I wouldn't say trash, since the game engine will get a boost from implementation of Eevee. Also the game engine does not have an alternative (inside Blender) and there are many uses for it outside of game creation. Definitely disagree with you there.

  26. I agree that blender is becoming heavier...
    I use BI because it work on every machine, with no care about GPU, O-GL vers. etc... :(

    • Ok, so you can always continue to use 2.79, or go back to an earlier version even. If you don’t want to adapt to the times, that’s fine. Older versions will always be available.

      • Brian Lockett on

        "If you don't want to adapt to the times, that's fine."

        That's a rather passive-aggressive way to brand his opinion, wouldn't you say?

        What's with this subtle hostility around here? :/

        It's okay if some folks personally express different views than your own.

        It's not like their view is going to change Blender Foundation's whole agenda now.

        It's just a comment section, and some people are just expressing a preference.

        There's room for it.

    • Blender internal is a renderer, and as such it can render the volumetrics/particles resulting from the simulation, but do not simulate anything. The simulation system(s) will stay untouched.

      • Actually the simulation systems will change also. For example flip fluids and mantaflow and fracture modifier are coming. Also the modifiers will be programmed again from scratch. Updating the old renderer to support all that new code would be long and stupid job, because only very rare people uses it anymore

    • I was curious about this, so I pulled up a scene in 2.8 beta that had some spaceship engine exhaust, and I was impressed, the viewport was relatively fluid (albeit somewhat less realistic), displaying my fire, with volumatic materials assigned to it. Of course, switching back to Cycles with GPU rendering gave me better viewport realism. This also cleared up another concern I had - volumatic lights. Eevee does this *fantastically* well (not to mention includes additional base lamps)! Blender Internal is completely irrelevant to me now. OpenGL is an excellent baseline to build on, and Cycles can than be invoked at the final stages of a project for more immersive photorealism.

  27. Roger Hamilton on

    Don't know how useful a metric this is, as I am noob-ish, but I've been using 2.79b to edit a video from an old family reunion, 720x480, CPU rendering on a mid-2009 Macbook Pro (2.26 GHz Core 2 Duo, 8M RAM, SSD storage). Under 2.79b, I rendered a 400 frame sample with BI selected, then Cycles. Both took 1:14. Downloaded the latest 2.8 build just now, and did the same test with EEVEE selected, and then Cycles. EEVEE took 0:29, and Cycles took 0:36. There is some UI lag when I switch options here and there; don't know if that is buggy or just my old hardware. And EEVEE crashes Blender most of the time (Cycles works fine). So I'm happy with the render increases. Will be very happy to see performance and stability at release. I'm happy enough that I will probably finish up my work in 2.79b, then do my final render in Cycles in 2.80, as this is just video with a few motion graphic overlays.

  28. I was trying to explain how to create a leaf texture with transparency in Cycles. Couldn't for the life of me figure out the correct way to wire the nodes.

  29. If internal render is removed , Than want about the game engine? Still the game engine will use internal or new engine?

      • Really Reavenk. This is really a bad news for me and game developers who's is using blender game engine . What is the reason to remove the internal and game engine. Do any one know the reason??

        • The reason is those features use old, old code that was holding Blender back. The game engine hasn’t had much work for a while, as far as I’m aware, since Yo Frankie. As far as I’m concerned, nothing is changing except it’s now official that the Blender game engine in its current form, will not get any more work in the official branch. Of course you can continue to use 2.79, and Blender is open source, so you can program your own new features.

          As far as game development in general, I don’t know the last time, if ever I have seen a truly good or even decent game from the Blender internal engine. It’s a fun little toy to play with, but again, that’s not changing, 2.79 will always be available.

        • Indeed the game engine is truly outdated. Not only that, but in recent years there have been some amazing new game engines. Ue4, unity are the biggest. But I found for smaller projects Godot to be the best choice.

          Having a game engine again is still on Tom's radar, but far in the future. There are more important things to be worked on. There is no infinite amount of developers available.

          So yeah, it might be a step back for you. But if you take a little time to learn any of those free engins you're helping yourself in the long run. Those engines have way better online support and allow you to do more easily. And it's not at all hard to use your blender models there.

        • Old code, too much time to update to work with new features.
          Use Godot game engine If you want to stay open source.

  30. As a person who only used the Internal Render for 10 years, now I have to do research of this new engine replacing it and how it will affect this project of mine. Right now, I don't have any expectations towards it.

  31. Not happy with this being removed at all. The new render system is node based like cycles, and i absolutely hate the node based system with a vehemence, i spent months trying to understand it with cycles and never got it, plus it seems that Eevee has no texture bake, leaving you to struggle with cycles which is not very good when it comes to texture baking. Also i can't work out how to show the texture on the model as textured mode seems to be missing.

      • You can keep using 2.7x but eventually you'll run into a ceiling. Blender Internal has a limit to what it can do. At some point, no matter how much more skilled you become artistically, you'll run in to things you want to achieve but can't with internal. This is because the settings are set in stone. there is only so much sliders you can tweak, and if you want to change something where there is no slider for, than you're stuck.

        This is why there is a node system now. it allows you to go as advanced as you want. Really the only limit is that your pc can't handle the calculations anymore.

        I'd love to help you out with understanding the nodes if that is the problem! Once it clicks in your mind, you don't want to go back, i promise!

        • Brian Lockett on

          "You can keep using 2.7x but eventually you'll run into a ceiling. Blender Internal has a limit to what it can do. At some point, no matter how much more skilled you become artistically, you'll run in to things you want to achieve but can't with internal. This is because the settings are set in stone. there is only so much sliders you can tweak, and if you want to change something where there is no slider for, than you're stuck."

          That would depend entirely upon the artist's particular needs. For some people, Blender Internal is sufficient. For others, EEVEE looks like a breath of fresh air.

          "This is why there is a node system now. it allows you to go as advanced as you want. Really the only limit is that your pc can't handle the calculations anymore."

          It's also a logical input system, that (depending who you are) can break you out of "artist" mindset, if you start to get a complicated web of nodes.

          Sometimes the dislike for nodes is simply preference--not necessarily just a resistance towards something new(er). Nodes are useful, but they simply won't be for everyone.

          Most people will simply adapt to Blender's nodes, whether they personally prefer it or not, but we'll still have some folks who just simply prefer a more UI-based way of tweaking things.

          And that's okay. Their opinions are not hindering or dictating Blender's development. But it's nice to be heard, anyways. That's how communities work and co-exist. :)

        • The Blender developers force me to stay with 2.7x for a long period of time. I don't want to sound harsh in this criticism, event if it may sound that way.

          Essentially they refuse to finalize the Python API until very late in the release process. They also straight forwardly refuse to document the existing Python API changes. They certainly have their reasons for this. But for me it means I can't update my scripting, and the developers of the other add-ons I depend on can't update their scripts either. That even applies to most of the add-ons shipped with 2.8, ironically.

          • What is this for ungrateful comment. Blender developers create blender voluntarily, and anyone can be a blender developer. You're not paying anyone to work for you. And no-one is forcing you to do anything. No one is refusing as no one is obligated to do anything.

            This is the basis of a community made open-source program. If you want something changed, hope someone will do it for you, or do it yourself.

            Sure there are rules in place for the main version of blender that is shipped on the website. but these rules are made in good discussion with the most active developers.

            But no one is stopping you from making your own blender version.

            It's like saying people are forcing you to walk to town because they refuse to build you a car....

          • also this "refusal" as you call it, is because you are not the only stakeholder for blender. Millions of people use blender and everyone for different reasons. The fact that you are angry that needs of others came before yours, and that developers decided to put their precious, voluntary time into things that are important for other people than you, is childish and ungrateful.

          • I did not want it to sound ungrateful. But the statements I made are facts and they are entirely the result of choices of the core developers. I had hoped that my qualifications made it clear that I recognize their right to do so. I don't agree with their reasoning on not documenting or fixing scripts in the interim, because some add-on developers like me are willing to work with WIP APIs, even if it means fixing add-ons multiple times. But we are prevented to do that. And that incidentally means that many addons, even those included in current 2.8 builds, just won't work until much later in the release process. I don't agree with the idea that it is better to avoid add-on developers whining about API changes more than once. Again, I disagree but recognize the decision has been made.

            That doesn't change, however, the consequences which I laid out. I do not expect anyone to change their decisions because of these statements. I only tried to voice my opinion.

            And regarding making the changes myself... Well I could fix certain scripts if I knew how the API worked, but the way Blender development works right now makes this entirely beyond my reach. Again, this is the right of the core developers, and it probably stems from a desire to develop 2.8 as fast as possible.

            And again, I was only explaining why I have to stick with 2.7 for much longer than I'd like, considering how awesome the new 2.8 features are. I don't like the idea that criticizing an Open Source projects policies is off-limits just because many developers are unpaid. People complain, and sometimes they have a point. Get over it.

          • Brian Lockett on

            @ANDREAS Ignore MRTHERICH. He's being a self-appointed comment police around here.

            Guy thinks everyone has to align with his point of view, lest he reprimand them.

    • I have no idea what complicated tutorials you have watched than. The material nodes are super easy in the basics.
      - You have your material output node. you choose a shader node. In most cases the Principle BSDF does the job perfectlyY
      - You connect your image texture node and choose a texture.
      - It uses the default UV map. If you want to use another there is a UVmap node.
      - Tweak the slides of Rougness (shinyness) or metallic (how much it looks like metal)

      Thats all.

      if you want transparency, add a Shader mix node in between the output and principled shader. and a transparency node to the mix node. your alpha texture controls the mix factor.

      Baking might be something to come to eevee in the future.

      To show the texture you go to material mode. Texture mode was a weird in between mode that showed inconsistent results.

      • Brian Lockett on

        As I've stated several times here on this page, nodes aren't for everyone.

        Granted, I do advise Belidos to just keep using Blender 2.7x. Still, I can somewhat relate to his frustration.

        Personally, I can use nodes, but I use nodes in several other software. The only problem with nodes-everything being everywhere is that nodal systems are very left-brain ways of working, and art is, well, very right-brain.

        As a programmer, I can deal with nodes okay, while doing 3D work, but sometimes you do want a more visual (that is, UI-based) way of working, without turning on your "logical" side all the time, battling with your "creative" side.

        Oh, and the problem isn't that nodes are complicated--it's that nodes can GET complicated, if you're working with large oodles of noodles, if you know what I mean.

        Basic node usage isn't the problem. It's when you start getting into more complicated models and larger scenes, that your eyes can sorta get MEGO staring at the web of nodes you've created (even when you use groups and labels and whatnot).

        Again, I'm not making a case for Blender Internal to remain, but I hate this idea that everyone has to conform to this idea that "nodes are perfect" or "nodes are for everyone" some folks here seem to be promoting.

        (To the point that any and every comment expressing what Belidos has expressed sorta gets this immediate policing by the EEVEE fans...)

        No method is perfect. Every input method human beings have ever created has its advantages, its drawbacks, and its risks.

        It's okay if some folks express that, for themselves personally, nodes aren't their favorite thing. It's better to vent a little, even among the community.

        It's okay if someone doesn't prefer nodes or particularly agree with one's way of thinking about EEVEE, guy. It's all a matter of personal taste and preference.

        Some folks are just going to be disappointed, as with all significant changes. It doesn't mean Blender Foundation's taking this to heart and changing their minds.

        It just means the comment section is being freely used, for a little venting. In other words: No correction is needed, for every opinion expressing disappointment. ;)

        • All i wanted to point out is that for 90% of the cases not more than 5 nodes are needed in a very basic structure. No logic needed, just remembering what goes where.

          plug principled into output, plug image into Base color You can even easily do this from the right settings menu. Sure it's different from BI but it's not more complicated. just different. I'd even say it's a bit more intuitive since there are no inconsistently named things.

          On the your argument about left and right brained (besides this being an outdated simplistic idea) Nodes were invented to make logic more accessible for less logically thinking people. Nodes are created as an alternative for code. It is a visual representation of what is happening. Hence making it more intuitive for visual orientated people.

          Right side of a node gives an image results that flows along the line into the left side of another node. The node changes some settings and then gives it on.

          Tell me honestly if this:
          https://imgur.com/a/t7euYsc
          Really looks more intuitive and clear than this:
          https://imgur.com/a/BfUzpCm

          Objectively the first is a jungle of buttons and settings. most of which you never need, all there dumped upon on your screen. The second is an organized graph with only the necessary settings showing.

          I feel that there is another issue here: that is preference to familiarity. Lots of people who have been working with blender for a long time, especially if they started in the old days, have gotten used to this cluttered mess of sliders and buttons. It's like feeling at home in your room while it's a total mess. It's a mess, but it's your mess, you know where to find everything. Then your mom came along, cleaned everything up, and suddenly you couldn't find anything anymore.

          But after a while of living in your new clean room, you start to see why having a clean organized room is so useful. (I can't believe i'm saying this, my mom must be proud of me)

          This whole thing has nothing to do with logic. As long as you are not doing fancy procedural calculations, barely any math is involved. For anyone "left" or "right" brained, the node system is objectively more intuitive and clear. This has more to do with a willingness or ability to let go of something familiar and daring to learn something new to better yourself.

          This was why I talked about the skill ceiling. I have no stake in anyone using nodes or not. I could care less, but i don't because I wish everyone to get the best out of what they have in them.

          Most people forgot the struggles they had to learn something, BI once had to be learned too. Sure there are improvements to be made to the UI of the node system. I remember the first time i used it, i couldn't find the right nodes, and the search menu didn't help me, since apparently there are two separate search menu's there... So maybe a more visual list with icons would help.
          But it's a difference between finding the right tool from a menu or finding the right tool in a jungle of buttons and sliders.

          I'm trying to force people to do anything, i'm just urging them on to try something new to broaden their horizon. In the end, it's all just tools. And what I do is no different than suggesting a cushioned ergonomic chair to a straight wooden one because it's better for your back.

Leave A Reply

To add a profile picture to your message, register your email address with Gravatar.com. To protect your email address, create an account on BlenderNation and log in when posting a message.