I have mixed feelings viewing this from afar (not on beta atm). A renderer which yields physically-based-looking results but quickly, that piques my interest.
The collaborative aspect is ok, but it's one of those things that gives good demo without necessarily being compelling for production. It's a valuable plus, but not something I would base my choice of renderers on, because the majority of production work I've dealt with can't be shown to clients without going through a compositing step. Even while I do a great amount of work remotely, realtime lighting decisions are not usually what needs discussion. So it's not enough to act as a primary draw, for me, although the flexibility is certainly a benefit.
The people involved get my full attention, though. It's entirely possible there's a workflow or paradigm I'm not seeing here, and I'll be listening to them carefullly as we learn more. What does this software have to offer me over options like Arnold? Physically based materials much faster than maxwell? Ok, that's compelling. Multi-user remote collaboration? Interesting, but the renderer has to compete in all other regards before it becomes a deal maker. $80-100/month means price isn't it's selling point, although that pricing isn't bad. So, my questions would be:
Is it physically based then? Can stylized/artistic looks also be achieved, and special effects passes like luminous materials, fractal masks etc?
It sounds like collaborative shot setup is part of the tool. If so, this is interesting and potentially a major draw. How does it fit in and compare, then, with tools like katana?
How much control does the user have in terms of making new materials and shaders? If there is something powerful like krakatoa's magmaflow in the works, then we wants it, my precious...
What is the artists experience like using it? One of the reasons some of the newer renderers are so popular is ease of use, the artist can focus on the artwork and not fight with a learning curve. How does the product balance the need for control with a need for simple usability?
Is there support for rendering things other than geometry, for instance point clouds or implicit surfaces?
What is the workflow like in terms of getting assets to the renderer, and what passes and formats does the renderer output?
How does the renderer deal with post process effects like DoF, lens types, shapes and distortion, color grading, and the alll-important motion blur?
If collaborative use and near realtime, physical results are the selling point, I would expect it to have potential with product and motion design, previs etc but not perhaps commercials and film. Is it targeted at competitors like Bunkspeed shot and iRay? Or is it intended for film and animation?
One way or another Thiago and his team are people I respect and admire, who have a proven track record of innovation. So whatever they do and whatever their eventual answers are to these kinds of questions, I'll be paying close attention and cheering for them.
