Author Topic: screwing around with architecture  (Read 22023 times)

Offline fleetwood

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1232
Re: screwing around with architecture
« Reply #15 on: July 07, 2015, 04:07:08 AM »
Here is the cube with some small fake stones confined to the dark areas and 50 degree slopes or less.
I tested the plain cube I have with no displacement takes 37 minutes to render at detail 0.8 AA8.
With all the cracking pattern displacement and fake stones this render took 46 minutes at the same 0.8 detail AA8.
Made the small fake stones orange just so they can be seen and used the slope restriction to keep them off the vertical surface.

Offline TheBadger

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7416
  • what's the difference?
Re: screwing around with architecture
« Reply #16 on: July 07, 2015, 04:53:23 AM »
Thanks!

Quote
I tested the plain cube I have with no displacement takes 37 minutes to render at detail 0.8 AA8

Um, I guess I did not even think to adjust setting for my OP. The image was default except for RTO.
I re rendered to take note of the time

With RTO off, and no other changes to settings i got 35 seconds.
What is effecting you to get such long render times?

I will re-render with your settings to see what happens.
It has been eaten.

Offline TheBadger

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7416
  • what's the difference?
Re: screwing around with architecture
« Reply #17 on: July 07, 2015, 05:03:05 AM »
Did it with your settings, there is very little difference on the edges of the model, in my case.

Much less displacement and no procedurals of course so that is one thing... What else?

1m:35s so a big jump from default with detail increase and AA.

But why does your cube with no displacement take so long? just curious is all. Maybe some info here that can help in the long run.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2015, 05:05:02 AM by TheBadger »
It has been eaten.

Offline fleetwood

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1232
Re: screwing around with architecture
« Reply #18 on: July 07, 2015, 03:53:04 PM »
But why does your cube with no displacement take so long?

I think it's mostly due to size and quality settings I used because if I render at 800 X 450 as you did, and use detail .4 AA4, the plain cube with a totally flat planet terrain and 16 atmosphere samples and no prepass the cube renders in 31 seconds.

Other thoughts.
1. My example renders are 1600 x 900 and yours are 800 x 450, so the bigger has 4 times the pixels to calculate. It should take at least 4 times longer just based on size.
2. My machine is a Window 8,  asus I7 desktop with 12 gb memory - 8 threads possible
3. My scene includes a large amount of planet terrain surface that has displacement and shadows that have to be calculated where your example scene has no planet terrain.
4. I have my Atmosphere quality set at 64 samples.
5. I used large diameter soft shadows. No reason, just tried it for looks.
6. I used a detailed supersample GI prepass with settings 4/5/8 - the prepass alone can take 5 minutes.

« Last Edit: July 07, 2015, 03:57:19 PM by fleetwood »

Offline TheBadger

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7416
  • what's the difference?
Re: screwing around with architecture
« Reply #19 on: July 07, 2015, 07:14:32 PM »
Thank you!

Here is some of the inside. Just got to get some energy to finish the detailing/age/ruin now.
It has been eaten.

Offline bobbystahr

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10428
  • Turn, and face the Strange Ch Ch Changes...D Bowie
Re: screwing around with architecture
« Reply #20 on: July 07, 2015, 07:32:25 PM »
Thank you!

Here is some of the inside. Just got to get some energy to finish the detailing/age/ruin now.
(Attachment Link)

Now that you've shown that as well as the exterior I'm afraid you must finish it now....hee hee hee
something borrowed,
something Blue.
Ring out the Old.
Bring in the New
Bobby Stahr, Paracosmologist

Offline TheBadger

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7416
  • what's the difference?
Re: screwing around with architecture
« Reply #21 on: July 07, 2015, 07:54:51 PM »
 ;D Thanks B.

Here is the last self pleasuring test image I will post until its all done.


I remember that I said I would break a part of this off to share. And I will too. Remember that it took me forever to share those shrooms. On the plus side, this is a much better done model than my shrooms, so I hope it will be worth the time and effort.

THis is a side project to my mushroom thing. THe mushroom project is my life goal, and may not get gone in my life time, But this fantasy city may... maybe not.
It has been eaten.

Offline fleetwood

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1232
Re: screwing around with architecture
« Reply #22 on: July 07, 2015, 07:55:24 PM »
Looking really good.

Offline bobbystahr

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10428
  • Turn, and face the Strange Ch Ch Changes...D Bowie
Re: screwing around with architecture
« Reply #23 on: July 07, 2015, 08:02:26 PM »
something borrowed,
something Blue.
Ring out the Old.
Bring in the New
Bobby Stahr, Paracosmologist

Offline Kadri

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8502
Re: screwing around with architecture
« Reply #24 on: July 07, 2015, 08:11:10 PM »

Sweet.
Just one question.Why is there a line at the edge of the stones? Just curious Michael.

Offline TheBadger

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7416
  • what's the difference?
Re: screwing around with architecture
« Reply #25 on: July 07, 2015, 08:14:18 PM »
I am sure I can give you an answer, but what line are you seeing?
It has been eaten.


Offline fleetwood

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1232
Re: screwing around with architecture
« Reply #27 on: July 07, 2015, 08:27:56 PM »
The same issue can be seen on a simple cube. Positive displacements move the faces generally outwards, but the edges remain original dimensions, leaving small step like structures along the edges.

Offline TheBadger

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7416
  • what's the difference?
Re: screwing around with architecture
« Reply #28 on: July 07, 2015, 08:30:47 PM »


I believe it is from a combination of too high "bounce to the ounce" as well as slightly too high displacement settings regarding the image map and RTO off.
I believe it is fixable without altering the model out side of TG. It happens in a few other places as well but not as bad.

If you look just to the left of the line you highlighted, you will see that those edges are showing as displaced, these edges should not be visible as displacement, I must have moved them inward. THis is also happening throughout the model. I need to fix that for sure. I spent a lot of time making the stones and making them the right size and shape. These rouge edges are pissing me off even more than the line you pointed out.
It has been eaten.

Offline TheBadger

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7416
  • what's the difference?
Re: screwing around with architecture
« Reply #29 on: July 07, 2015, 08:32:45 PM »
The same issue can be seen on a simple cube. Positive displacements move the faces generally outwards, but the edges remain original dimensions, leaving small step like structures along the edges.
YES! Thank you! I was thinking about it before when I set my displacement settings, and I thought maybe I should make this negative. Well now I need to try.
It has been eaten.