Started by WAS, November 04, 2018, 10:12:15 am
Quote from: Oshyan on November 04, 2018, 09:52:17 pmLiterally impossible to say without looking at the scene file. Knowing you're on low-end hardware and, especially, with limited memory, and that you've said in the past you don't think swapping to disk is something that must be avoided at all costs, I'm honestly not that surprised. Especially with lots of cloud layers. And no, the layers have not been designed not to intersect, why would they? In real life the altitude ranges of cloud types overlap. It's not as if they're all meant to be used simultaneously in any given scene, so there's no particular reason to correlate their altitude ranges to each other. Realism is the goal. The mid-level ones are all at the same altitude, and so are the low level ones, just with different depth values.- Oshyan
Quote from: Oshyan on November 06, 2018, 12:19:57 amFunny, your illustration largely contradicts your statement, with stratus, stratocumulus, and cumulus all occupying the same base altitude, not to mention the anvil type (again, base altitude), while altocumulus and altostratus also occupy the same altitude range. Etc, etc. Yes, there are separations between *certain* cloud types, which are reflected in our presets, but otherwise they tend to exist in *altitude ranges*.- Oshyan
Quote from: Oshyan on November 06, 2018, 11:27:42 pmPlease quote above where I said anything about clouds "converting" vs. "transform", etc. I wasn't talking about that *at all*. I think you're radically misunderstanding my point. Here's what we're trying to do: provide cloud type presets that are reasonably realistic *aesthetic* representations of real-world cloud types with generally realistic altitude ranges. If you look at your diagram and the default altitudes of our Easy Cloud presets, they correspond pretty well. What we are *not* trying to do is have cloud types automatically change based on altitude, or enforce any kind of accuracy or realism, etc. We provide a realistic starting point, it's up to the user to determine if they want to change that from realistic default or not.- Oshyan
Quote from: Oshyan on November 07, 2018, 01:06:41 amNope, once again you're miscontruing my intent and what I believe I have clearly explained. The bottom line: we do not do things *for* the user to avoid lack of realism or collisions or whatever. Multiple cloud types occupy the same altitude range because that is realistic, those same cloud types are shown in those same ranges in the illustration you posted. If someone *chooses* to add several different types within the same altitude range, then yes they will overlap. That's their fault, not ours, and we want people to have the *option* to do as much as we can allow them to do within the bounds of technological limitations. Changing the altitude of cloud layers automatically to avoid collision would not only not be realistic, it would not be intuitive. - Oshyan
Quote from: Oshyan on November 07, 2018, 02:38:58 amDecided to test your assertions. I added 1 cloud layer in each altitude range using the Easy Cloud presets in the default scene, High Level: Cirrocumulus, Mid-level: Alticumulus Castellanus, and Low-level: Cumulus Medium. Then I tilted the camera up to get a mostly-sky view. First render was 4m36s. Then I increased the base altitude of the top 2 layers, ensuring there was no overlap. Render time was 4m45s. Slower than with them closer/potentially overlapping. Re-tested with Cirrocumulus, Altostratocumulus Large, and Stratocumulus, and then again with Cirrucumulus, Altocumulus Castellanus, and Cumulus Large. Similar results in all cases, i.e. render time is basically the same for default altitudes vs. enforced greater spacing. In fact it tends to be slightly *longer* for enforced spacing, though I don't think this has anything to do with the overlap issue, more likely to just be more cloud visible since the thicker clouds get put at higher altitude. So yeah, I don't see a problem here.Which suggests there is a problem in the file you're using and encountering slowdown in. Possibly it's due to overlap (which can but does not always cause a lot of slowdown), possibly it's due to other settings. We'd have to look at the TGD to be sure. And in any case the defaults are fine.- Oshyan
Quote from: Matt on November 07, 2018, 04:26:39 pm1. The more layers of Easy Cloud or Cloud Layer V3 you have in the scene, the longer it will take to render. This might have a more pronounced effect in the pre-pass.2. This can be mitigated by the "Cloud GI max ray depth" parameter in GI Settings, which should be kept to 1 or 2 if you're experiencing slow renders.3. When layers of these cloud types get close to each other, this tends to increase render times even more.4. Overlapping cloud layers are worse than non-overlapping layers.5. If you add multiple cloud layers (even from different presets), they might overlap. However, if you only choose one "high altitude" preset, one "mid-level" preset and one "low altitude" preset, they won't overlap *except* if the lower cloud is the "Cumulus, Large" preset.6. In general, when cloud renders become slow, try lower values for "millions of voxels" on each cloud layer.