TheKitchenAbode

BugsinNM - You should take care to not misquote - I said you can buy a new full version. I did not state that it does not need licensing verification. The licensing agreement states that CA has the right to verify. Please do not use my name if you are going to alter or imply something I did not say. Thank you.

BugsinNM - Just read the Licensing Agreement, the answers you seek are all in there.

You have a habit of not reading what I write. If you purchase a new full version then you have for all intent and purpose bought an upgrade.

The elimination of the hardware key and the move to software/internet validation only is an entirely separate issue. It has nothing to do with SSA or your entitlement or no entitlement to upgrades. As far as I'm concerned CA is in it's full rights to insist on some means to verify that users are in compliance with their user licensing agreement. Read the agreement, when you purchase the software you agree that they can do this. There is nothing unusual or sinister about this, it's done all the time, not just in software but in anything that is related to licensing. If you are a business and you license someone else's technology or process you will be subject to auditing by the licensor as part of your licensing agreement.

You are not listening. If you don't have the SSA program and say after 3 years you want the most up to date version you just pay the full price for that version. If you don't like that you can pay the SSA fee and be entitled to the upgrades at no additional cost as long as your SSA is valid. Pay me now or pay me later, the choice is yours.

What's there to show, you just go to the website and purchase the latest version.

I personally think you are misinterpreting things. The software validation is done to ensure that you are abiding by your licensing agreement regardless of whether or not you have SSA. SSA is unrelated, it's an additional paid for service that provides improved technical support, access to additional libraries and program updates. You are not compelled to have SSA. If you have purchased the software outright you can use it for as long as you wish. If you have SSA you do not have to renew it. If you choose not to renew it then whatever version of CA you are running still functions, you just won't be entitled to the additional features offered under the SSA program. I'm not sure where you have gotten the idea that SSA is a requirement. It's optional.

That's similar to my licensing. For Windows I can have it on 5 pcs and I believe the same for my MS Office 360 monthly subscription. Microsoft monitors this as I can go to my Microsoft account and see what systems the software is installed on. My understanding for Windows is that it uses both software and hardware locking. When Windows is installed it obtains and stores a code embedded in a some chip on your motherboard, when Windows starts up it checks for a match. When you download Windows updates it does a software verification and I also suspect it is doing this on an ongoing basis behind the scene. It's not just for security, they collect a lot of marketing data via this.

Thanks for the clarification Mick.

Just another thought, I suspect that with the newer versions of CA that even if you use a hardware key it is still performing a software/internet verification when you have an active internet connection. You could likely verify this by going to your account and checking if the system with the Key in it is listed as activated.

I think the problem with a firmware lock would be that CA would be locked to only that computer, you would likely loose the ability to have it installed on several systems. That would not be dissimilar to Microsoft Windows which is tied specifically to your computer. CA licensing is to the user which is a huge advantage, you may have the software installed on multiple systems, the only restriction is that the number of active instances can't exceed your licensee limitation. Things may have changed but when I originally purchased Photoshop CS2 it was tied to the computer, if I tried to put the software on another system it would refuse to install saying it was already installed on another computer. Personally, I believe CA has taken a very liberal approach to it's licensing. Software/internet licensing verification seems to me to be the best solution currently available that addresses CA's protective property rights and the needs of likely 99.9% of it's users. I have no problem with a "Trust but Verify" approach.

Yes, everything does rely on there being an internet connection and certainly if this is not available then you will have a problem. Not sure what the odds are that one would be without an internet connection for that length of time though. If I was going to mount an argument for the need of a hardware key it would be based on what would happen if CA were to go bankrupt and there was no other company willing to assume and carry on it's business.

Concerning hardware locks. I believe we need to understand what I believe to be the issue for CA concerning these keys as they can be easily worked around. I myself fully respect CA's right to take appropriate measures to protect their intellectual property. Their approach is not uncommon and from my experience it is actually more relaxed than many others. Many others do not permit a single licensed user to have the software installed on multiple systems, CA permits this along with the ability to easily via the internet active and deactivate the license between systems. All they are concerned about is to verify that you are a legitimate user and that the software is not active on more systems than your licensing permits. I understand that some users may feel that this, in some manner, may infringe on their interpretation of ownership rights, or that utilizing an internet verification method may for some, be cause for potential privacy or big brother concerns. In my opinion, especially the latter, this concern as it relates to CA is highly over exaggerated, especially given the fact that everything you do in your browser, e-mail, e-commerce and the likes of Facebook is being logged, stored, scanned and disseminated to others. I'm just not sure what other approach CA can take that would better address the piracy, ownership rights and privacy issues to the full satisfaction of every user.

Please post the error message. If it's about not be able to run photon mapping then it means you do not have an light source anywhere in your scene. if you do not want photon mapping then just uncheck it and the Ray Trace should run.

When you say it crashes, do you mean your computer shuts down or do you just get an error message. If it is an error message could you post it.

Just open your inspirational pic in a separate window and arrange the windows on your screen so you can see both at the same time. If you have more than one screen then have one on each screen.

I'll check out CNN, for sure it will be Trumps fault.

I love conspiracy theories. Maybe the slow down in X10 is due to CA running a hidden Bitcoin mining algorithm on our systems. That's why the new PBR camera is primarily GPU based.

I find the issue to be the fact that the Standard view camera and the PBR camera share many common settings in the Camera DBX. If I have a PBR camera with all the goodies turned on then they are also active in the Standard view camera. These should be separate so I can have a Standard view camera configured differently than a PBR camera. Currently if I want a fast Standard view I turn off the bloom, reflections, cast shadows and reduce the ambient occlusion, but when I switch to a PBR I have to go back into the camera DBX and turn these things back on, then when I switch back to the Standard camera I have to go back and turn them off. Very time consuming. Each type of camera should be completely independent from any other camera. If I'm incorrect in this observation please let me know. If however this is correct, then it raises the question as to how something so obvious was overlooked and not immediately addressed. It's not like some obscure bug that only raises it's ugly head under some rare circumstance.

Looks like "Z" fighting, where two materials are actually in the same position. Check to make sure that the exterior finish is not in the same plane as the underlying sheathing. Increasing the exterior finish thickness should resolve this.

Thanks GreenBeans. I suggest you read through the postings and comments in this and experiment with these suggestions. It's important to realize that there is no single one-click to a great Ray Trace, it's the culmination of many things. Also, keep in mind that the suggestions should not be taken as the only means to obtain a good result, nothing is ever carved in stone and there are only what I have found to work for me. The most important thing is to explore one item at a time so you can get a handle on it's effect. Changing too many things at once will make it difficult to gain this most important knowledge. You should fill in your signature so others will know what version of CA you are using and the type of computer system you are using. This is will help when others are attempting to assist you. The best assistance will be when you have a question concerning a specific item, it's very difficult or impossible to answer a generalized question such as "how do I get a good Ray Trace".

The light above the cabinet is referred to as light bleed. Make sure to have a roof on you model and a foundation with a floor. If the bleed still persist you will need to reduce the sun's intensity or try some different ambient occlusion settings. I would suggest turning Caustics Off, won't due much for the scene unless you have glass light fixtures, having it off will reduce the time to Ray Trace. The grain(static) can be caused by a variety of things, lot's of polished materials and/or certain ambient occlusion settings. It will usually cleanup but might take more passes.

So far I find it to be pretty good. I use several versions of it for my white cabinets, trim and ceiling. Just change the sheen level (roughness). For the ceiling I set it between 80 - 100% for a flat finish, trims about 30% for a pearl finish and about the same for my cabinets. For gloss cabinets I would change it to reflective(X9) and might go up as high as 70%.

Hi Scott, Happy New Year! Sounds as if you are having a lot of fun with Lumion 8, looking forward to seeing some of your results.

Glad you were able to get the roof working. Just wondering if the reason was related to your camera display settings, check the original plan to see if all of the roof elements were turned on, especially the roof planes.