Will performance for UDIMs be on par with Mari in future?

3D4Eva

Sometimes I have to work on bigger projects which has a lot of UDIMs and high resolution maps, but Mari seems to handle it much better, especially with baking nodes. Painter struggles and I'm stuck having to isolate off more to maintain performance while also working at a lower texture size.

Will Painter get up to speed with tools like Mari? I know that Painter records the brush strokes, so I'm not sure if this causes additional slow down? I also wish you could bake down the results on the go. Someone told me about collapsing a folder which is supposed to do this?

Has anyone else noticed the drastic difference between Mari and Painter for performance with UDIMs? 

Thanks! 

gnoop

I doubt it ever will.       Wish it wouldn't be so expensive

onionhead_o

Short answer is no. However i could see them make more optimization like Flattening Layers.... etc.

Mari is made to handle large UDIMs assets. while Painter is playing catchup on that end. Having Said that Painter still made some great improvements in the last few versions.

Mink

Not likely with adobe running the operations now and tightening it's grasp. Like one would predict, substance feature updates are becoming less and less ambitious and useful, and priorities are being shifted to increasingly experimental (useless) 3D programs that nobody will ever use. Things like their awful modeling program, and janky, sub-capable "houdini" capability within designer are what adobe's throwing the team at now, while the team still exists. When substance inevitably fails to meet expected earnings due to their forcibly out-of-touch priorities, expect most of the team to get cut and for the substance suite to increase in price, and future updates being relegated to maintence & driver updates before being abandoned entirely. 

This is what adobe does.

Jerc

It's actually pretty hard to compare the 2 because of how they fundamentally differ in terms of technology.
Mari paints on a 2d screen buffer that is then applied as a screen projection on the model, where Painter projects stamps directly on geometry in real time. Mari's paint strokes are baked in after a stroke, while painter's paint uses more of a vector approach where strokes are dynamically applied on the model on demand. Finally Mari uses shaders to generate masks and procedurals where Painter uses Substance.

So it's a little bit comparing apple and oranges but Mari will likely always be faster at some tasks, because Painter is trying to be as non-destructive as possible. Some of those performance bottlenecks may be due to technical choices, some could likely be improved with things like bake points indeed.
Where do you experience the most slowdowns? When painting? working with smart materials? masking?

Mink said:

...

You and I both have no idea what you're talking about. 

Mink

Jerc said:

It's actually pretty hard to compare the 2 because of how they fundamentally differ in terms of technology.
Mari paints on a 2d screen buffer that is then applied as a screen projection on the model, where Painter projects stamps directly on geometry in real time. Mari's paint strokes are baked in after a stroke, while painter's paint uses more of a vector approach where strokes are dynamically applied on the model on demand. Finally Mari uses shaders to generate masks and procedurals where Painter uses Substance.

So it's a little bit comparing apple and oranges but Mari will likely always be faster at some tasks, because Painter is trying to be as non-destructive as possible. Some of those performance bottlenecks may be due to technical choices, some could likely be improved with things like bake points indeed.
Where do you experience the most slowdowns? When painting? working with smart materials? masking?

Mink said:

...

You and I both have no idea what you're talking about. 

You sure about that? You're already including a proprietary DOA model format for substance source, and then requiring you pay double your substance subscription to do anything with it. The procedural modeling tools included in the newest versions of substance designer are even more useless and irrelevant than MDL materials. "Very Exciting" Things are always "In the pipeline" but aren't ever actually coming to fruition, and the once bi-yearly software updates have moved to a yearly basis. The adobe writing is on the adobe wall, and your new masters are trying to sink the software so hard, that the main substance page advertises the software as a pile of non-descript white squares with letters inside. Give me a break.