I have OptiX on this version. That should be on 3.0.1 or not?

I've done more work and seen that it is the new cycles X speed enhancements a.k.a nasty image. Ok for cartoons though I guess.

I've seen its LTS so trying version 2.93.8.

Uninstalling Blender 3.0.1. Reverting to Blender 2.93.4 for higher quality renders.

I've tried to open a file in the previous version and can't. I have backups!

In one render I used the standard denoised output mixed with the denoiser node output so I could blur out detail in some objects and not others.

I have tried to use different materials and configurations and it does not appear to affect the render output so that must have been a coincidence.

Have you been able to cross-compare between the last working/non-working versions? The renders had different light responses but they are subtle probably because the normals are sweeping across rather than being in opposing directions.

User error :( This is what happens if you work too late at night.

You're trying to reinitialize a const int in the loop. (line 449) - I just tested this in the C++ compiler and it's fine. More to this story, it is incorrect but the compiler has determined that it cannot be const so optimizes it out to be just int.

It's just the wrong text label in the UI I think.

I'm not sure anyone has looked into the actual issue here? In the file there is a 1x1m plane. In one corner (when rendered) there is a hair. The hair has a radius setting of 1 and a scale of 1 and should be 2 metres in diameter but it is 1 metre in diameter...

@"Jacques Lucke (JacquesLucke)"

What would be the impact of renaming it in the future?

I renamed the current 2.80 rc1 colormanagement folder to Xcolormanagement.
See my unzipped folder in image below...

Yes it has definitely done the job! :)

I think i've managed to cheat the system by copying the 2.79 colormanagement folder and replaced the 2.80 RC1 giving back the film color settings. It seems to work too. Nice dynamic programming!

I just wasted 11 hours of rendering BTW.

What in the h3ll is the point in removing these? Is there something about them that's broken?

Ok, thanks that is useful.

That's a shame. Changing the name breaks many tutorials. I don't see the point in renaming things like 'Remove Doubles' it will just cause confusion for existing users. I do understand that 'Merge by Distance' is more logical. Are there many other functional name changes? Is there a comparison/translation list for 2.79 -> 2.8?