best TG system but reasonably prized?

Started by Dune, June 20, 2015, 03:20:41 am

Previous topic - Next topic

Oshyan

It sounds like for path preservation reasons it would be useful to have partitions as you describe, Dune. But other than that reason, there is less and less need IMO to have separate partitions. One reason that is still somewhat valid is to separate your OS+applications and your data so that you can do full image backups to restore your system with while keeping the size down by avoiding big chunks of data. This is a valid strategy but is essentially already a reality in an SSD+HD system where the large HD is your data drive while the faster SSD is your OS+applications drive. No need to partition the HD if you ask me, there's no benefit to moving data from one partition to another after work is completed vs. just moving it from one *folder* to another.

If you have other reasons for partitioning your drive(s) then perhaps you can explain and I'll see if I think it still makes sense. Mine is just one perspective, of course. :D

- Oshyan

Dune

June 27, 2015, 02:26:45 am #31 Last Edit: June 27, 2015, 02:29:01 am by Dune
The paths are the main reason now (and an important one, as all my files hark back to this setup, unfortunately), but one of my previous reasons was that defragmentation isn't really necessary on partitions where I gather all finished works and library data. Working means a lot of fragmentation, but on one smaller partition it's quicker defragmented.
It would be easy if TG could locate the files by itself  ::)
I wonder if it would work to name folders like the partitions.... but I guess not.

Oshyan

SSDs don't need defragmentation and newer OSs (Win 7+) handle defrag in the background automatically anyway, so it's not something to structure your entire partition scheme around anymore.

Repathing is still a problem, certainly. Having TG "locate files by itself" would involve a probably lengthy automated search routine for each file (it could handle things a bit more intelligently by looking in the last folder it found a resource when searching for the next one, but this would only work a portion of the time). It would basically mean a long wait for relinking files, and it would still probably need manual intervention to confirm it's the right file since all TG stores is the name and path, and there may be many similarly named files. Basically, it's possible to do semi-automatically, but it may not be much better than what we have now, and would involve development time to implement. So I'm not sure it's worth it. Having people be responsible for managing their paths is, generally speaking, the best compromise. TG *could* do a better job of finding files in subfolders and whatnot though.

Using folders named like the path/drive wouldn't work (you can't actually name a folder D: for obvious reasons, hehe). But you *should* be able to map a *folder* to a *drive letter* in some way and *that* might actually take care of your pathing issue...

- Oshyan

Dune

Thanks Oshyan. Seems like you're stuck on a system once initiated  :(  I have to think about how many files I need to change paths in, whether it's worth getting rid of the partition system. I'd consider setting it up as one big partition, and it might be easiest to just change the 'H:folder\folder\name' into 'folder\folder\name' in a text editor before starting a tgd up.

Kadri

June 28, 2015, 09:18:20 am #34 Last Edit: June 28, 2015, 09:36:22 am by Kadri

Guys i am not sure if i understand the problem.
I put all my project files under the same folder structure every time.Like c:\scenes\  etc.
When i copy that folder to another drive there is no problem. When there is only one project to copy i copy it with the same structure.
Only that folder under the main folder;like D:\scenes\new project\  or E:\scenes\new project\  etc.
I had nor problem with this to find files on many different computers.What do i miss?

If you mean that you have some files in one drive and other project files on other drive that is a problem.
That is hard to use. I would stay away from that and use always one folder structure that is on one drive every time.
It can get very hard to use anyway.
At least i would use the gather project option in Terragen after the project ended and put all the files in one folder at the end.

You might end up with more then one file from the same files,but in the long run it is easier to use.
When you need 1 year later the same files they are all there.
In the past i remember that i changed,removed or deleted files that were in other places that actually belonged to some projects.
When the files are under the same folder structure that doesn't happen. The handicap is you need more place but i am ready to take this then the other options.

Dune

I only use the gather project option for files to upload to a render farm, not for every small project or test, otherwise I'd end up with numerous identical files. So I'm really stuck with a basic object and texture library that I always refer to.
I wonder what happens if I just make 2 partitions and call the second one H... (which is where my library is).

Kadri

Quote from: Dune on June 28, 2015, 10:06:46 am
I only use the gather project option for files to upload to a render farm, not for every small project or test, otherwise I'd end up with numerous identical files. So I'm really stuck with a basic object and texture library that I always refer to.
...


You will always have problem with that approach.But it is up to you of course Ulco.
I would at least use the same content management like in Lightwave.

D:\Content\images\*
D:\Content\objects\*
D:\Content\scenes\*

That would be easier to use.And you would have still only one file of everything.
Anyway. I don't know your HD requirements etc.

Dune

Thanks Kadri. I'll be mulling over this.

Thelby

I am getting to this thread a little late.
If you don't mind refurbished, then you should consider one of these as a starting point.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-Z600-Dual-Xeon-X5660-6C-2-80GHz-12-core-8GB-2TB-HDD-nVidia-FX1700-/121710911634?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item1c56892092
I purchased one similar to this here in the States, but mine is Dual Xeon x5650 2.66GHz. I paid $575 USD and added a couple of older Quadro FX2000 Vid cards that a Tech at the station I work for gave.
These things have 12 cores, 24 threads and smash time renders of my i7 2600.
I personally have No Problem with Refurbished computers. They are literally thousands off the original price and have been owned by Professional Companies that took care of them. I have 4 Refurbished computers and except for upgrades the only problem I have had came from 2007 Q6600 that I just installed a new Power supply and New Heatsink and Fan.
Check it out it may be just what you want for a starting point.

Dune

July 28, 2015, 11:58:07 am #39 Last Edit: July 28, 2015, 12:10:59 pm by Dune
Hey Thelby, thanks! I was just reconsidering my next purchase, so you're nicely in time with this idea. I'll check it out.

I was considering the following total:
Fractal design define S  €85,39
Gigabyte GV-N750OC-1GI  graphics €119,34
WD Black WD1003FZEX €82,99
Crucial 2x(!) sets  4x4 memory  127,90 x2 = €255,80
Gigabyte X99-UD4 mobo   €229,90
Scythe Mugen 4 PCGH  €44,90
Intel Core i7-5820 / 3.3 GHz processor  €404,90
Be Quiet Pure Power L8 430Watt  €64,90
Samsung 850 Pro 128GB SSD   €99,90

and some dvd reader, or I won't get win 7 in place  ;)