Rendertimes holding the product back!

Started by moodflow, April 09, 2007, 07:06:07 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

moodflow

Sorry for the rant as we all know rendertimes for TG2 are slower than sludge.

Unfortunately, this is seriously holding back my image creations with TG2.  Of course it is far superior to the other apps I use.  But I have abandoned many image projects due to them taking so long to render!  Its pretty sad when 800x600 images are taking days to render at decent quality settings (settings to where you can't really see the grain).  And this is on an AMD AM2 4600, with 2GB RAM.

There has to be something in the works to resolve this.  Right?  This program is amazing, but its limited as of now.  Or atleast until 20GHz PC's come out.

Now, "IF" we are stuck with this, then one option would really help:  image tiling.  I'm not talking about the crop feature either.  With image tiling we could render small sections of big and detailed images, and once done TG2 could just keep track of which tile goes where and assemble it into an image.  It would still take weeks or months to complete and image.  But the PC won't be clogged up and you wouldn't have to leave it on constantly for renders.

http://www.moodflow.com
mood-inspiring images and music

Oshyan

As we have previously discussed in similar threads there is significant optimization yet to be done. Our focus thus far has primarily been on feature implementation and stability. Optimization work will come later in a logical progression of development. This is simply the nature of working with a pre-release product. You can certainly expect the final version to be much faster, especially on multi-core/multi-CPU systems as the current rendering engine is single-thread.

Only time will tell just how much optimization is possible but I think that the combination of quality and render time TG2 offers will be very good when it is finalized later this year, particularly for those with computers purchased within the last 1-2 years. Older systems will of course suffer from poor performance, but this is to be expected with any modern graphics application on old hardware.

- Oshyan

dhavalmistry

looks like some one is having a bad day!!
"His blood-terragen level is 99.99%...he is definitely drunk on Terragen!"

moodflow

Quote from: dhavalmistry on April 09, 2007, 07:47:16 PM
looks like some one is having a bad day!!

Heheh!  Nahh not really even though I am stuck at work...  :o

Just get bummed when I see a great image at 400x300 resolution (that I want to make in a poster-quality 3200x2400 image) take nearly a week at 1024x768 and still not be finished.

And thanks Oshyan for the info.  This is just another 'hot-poker-in-the-side" for the development team to let them know we are their biggest fans...atleast they released a pre-release to play with.
http://www.moodflow.com
mood-inspiring images and music

Oshyan

I'm curious what hardware you're working with. A 1024x768 image really shouldn't be taking a week to render. It's possible you're just doing extremely complex scenes, or working on something that taxes TG2 more than usual (reflections for example), but my guess would be you just need better tuning of your detail settings. Although things are still not as fast as you would probably like, I think we can probably help reduce your render times without sacrificing the quality of the end result.

- Oshyan

king_tiger_666

that's the one thing that will stop be buying tg2 right now is the extreme render time.. maybe if there is significant optimizing later I may think again. also its not a final release.



<a href="www.hobbies.nzaus.co.nz/">My  Terragen Downloads & Gallery</a>

dhavalmistry

Quote from: Oshyan on April 09, 2007, 08:38:28 PM
I'm curious what hardware you're working with. A 1024x768 image really shouldn't be taking a week to render. It's possible you're just doing extremely complex scenes, or working on something that taxes TG2 more than usual (reflections for example), but my guess would be you just need better tuning of your detail settings. Although things are still not as fast as you would probably like, I think we can probably help reduce your render times without sacrificing the quality of the end result.

- Oshyan

oh yes....I have send them many files and they have fine tuned for me....the support is great....also if you dont want to bother them and let them work on the next update (so that they can release it sooner  ;) ), you can consult about your problems here. We are not as good as the support team but we ARE here for u.....I am sure you know that by now  ;D
"His blood-terragen level is 99.99%...he is definitely drunk on Terragen!"

rcallicotte

Really?  You must not have the trouble I have with $$.  The price will likely sky rocket by that time.  I would get with it now while the getting is good.  Then again, I'm not you.


Quote from: king_tiger_666 on April 09, 2007, 08:41:31 PM
that's the one thing that will stop be buying tg2 right now is the extreme render time.. maybe if there is significant optimizing later I may think again. also its not a final release.




So this is Disney World.  Can we live here?

king_tiger_666

Quote from: calico on April 09, 2007, 11:11:19 PM
Really?  You must not have the trouble I have with $$.  The price will likely sky rocket by that time.  I would get with it now while the getting is good.  Then again, I'm not you.

I don't know about that. the standard deep is 275$nz deep+ani is 414$nz 

damn that american dollar >:(
<a href="www.hobbies.nzaus.co.nz/">My  Terragen Downloads & Gallery</a>

Cyber-Angel

Will the optimisation include memory management and a render catch which are some of the ways you could go about it I understand that version 2 of the Brazil Render System will be getting them, and they are present in other renders as well, just throwing ideas out there.

Regards to you.

Cyber-Angel

DiscoBall

As with king tiger, I would REALLY suggest buying TG now.
Man thought it was only $200..lol

As Oshyan has said in the past, the final release price will skyrocket, dunno, maybe $1000+?
So I'd really suggest buying now :P


You could...buy...15..and resell them..and make a nice profit :P Think of it as a nice long term investment, lol :P

moodflow

Quote from: Oshyan on April 09, 2007, 08:38:28 PM
I'm curious what hardware you're working with. A 1024x768 image really shouldn't be taking a week to render. It's possible you're just doing extremely complex scenes, or working on something that taxes TG2 more than usual (reflections for example), but my guess would be you just need better tuning of your detail settings. Although things are still not as fast as you would probably like, I think we can probably help reduce your render times without sacrificing the quality of the end result.

- Oshyan

I am working with an AM2 4600 with 2GB of RAM.  I don't have any specific TGD files to post, but most of my scenes are highly complex (just because they can be).  I do use alot of reflections on rocks and such and tons of detail in the rocks.  Of course the skies are super detailed as well, with high quality clouds, etc. 

I've seen a few images that were completed at larger resolutions, and the clouds were the most amazing 'rendered' clouds I've ever seen.  I want clouds like that too.   ;D
http://www.moodflow.com
mood-inspiring images and music

rcallicotte

Moodflow, is it possible the number of samples on your clouds/atmosphere are above 256?  I usually use 16 to 32 on the atmosphere and 128 to 300 in the clouds.  Of course, the clouds seem subjective.  If we want all the grain in the clouds gone, then all of the quality settings are adjusted upward to some degree.  That degree is where some of us have gotten into similar troubles.  And, in case you don't know (you probably do), the clouds' setting for Ray Tracing doesn't usually need to be on and will definitely add time to the render.
So this is Disney World.  Can we live here?

moodflow

Quote from: calico on April 10, 2007, 11:13:34 AM
Moodflow, is it possible the number of samples on your clouds/atmosphere are above 256?  I usually use 16 to 32 on the atmosphere and 128 to 300 in the clouds.  Of course, the clouds seem subjective.  If we want all the grain in the clouds gone, then all of the quality settings are adjusted upward to some degree.  That degree is where some of us have gotten into similar troubles.  And, in case you don't know (you probably do), the clouds' setting for Ray Tracing doesn't usually need to be on and will definitely add time to the render.

Yea, the samples are at minimum 256, otherwise there is noticeable grain.  Some of the tests I've done have had samples as high as 2000+.  I am thinking I will stick with 256 samples across the board, with a .75 render quality on some of my next tests.   

I literally have a folder of unfinished images due to their taking too long to render at a decent resolution. 

Now here is the crazy talk:  I like to work with atleast a 2:1 step down, where the native image size is 2X as large as the final (for detail compression).  Higher ratios are even better, technically.  So if I want an image of 1600x1200, the minimum native resolution 'should' be 3200x2400.  I was able to pull this off on Terragen 0.9 and Bryce.  I'd love to see a high quality TG2 image of this resolution - I bet its amazing!  And for decent posters, the final would need to be around 3200x2400, meaning the native resolution would have to be 6400x4800 (for best results).  This would be a job for the BlueGene/L supercomputer.

I think we just need some simple renderfarm options (or does this exist yet?).  I'd go find some lower end PC's and set this up if it were implemented.  Find some old 1GHz jallopies and string them together with NetBEUI.  Watch my electric bill skyrocket in the name of kickass images!

http://www.moodflow.com
mood-inspiring images and music

Oshyan

Generally speaking the old "downsample trick" (working at 2x resolution) is unnecessary with TG2 now due to the improved detail and antialiasing options. In some cases it still helps but this is mostly due to needed improvements in the renderer, not a fundamental need for downsampling to achieve max quality. Ideally a renderer *should* output a properly detailed image without the need for downsampling and it should do so in less time than it would take to render the 2x resolution equivalent.

Of course you "can" create extremely detailed scenes and with the expanded capabilities of TG2 the possibility to do so is much greater. But you must also accept the increased render time as a result. You always pay a price for pushing the limits of what is possible.

- Oshyan