Author Topic: About RTP  (Read 895 times)

Offline pokoy

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 258
    • mswee.net
Re: About RTP
« Reply #45 on: June 13, 2019, 09:07:33 AM »
So, to summarize, I disagree on the quality of AA you claim still. If you did an exact export of the RTP, and than a same resolution standard rendered and difference them, there would be a whole lot of polygon and square shapes, that difference being from the lesser of the quality images -- the RTP...

You do realize that anything using displacement is only derived from the OpenGL preview and does not use the same polygon detail that the final renderer uses? It's clear that RTP can't deliver the same displacement quality that way, and it is not meant to do so currently.

As for clouds, I partially agree. RTP clouds sometimes differ in density and most of the time shadowing and GI and thus the general look can look entirely different. This is by design, too, but I wish we had a way to tweak the way RTP degrades clouds. I would happily trade a few seconds of time saved in RTP for a result closer to what the final render looks like.
Still, RTP is invaluable to get the general shape and layout of clouds right, I can't imagine working without it anymore, it has save me hours of test renders on every single project.

Offline Hannes

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4461
Re: About RTP
« Reply #46 on: June 13, 2019, 11:58:40 AM »
Still, RTP is invaluable to get the general shape and layout of clouds right, I can't imagine working without it anymore, it has save me hours of test renders on every single project.

Oh yes!!!

Offline bobbystahr

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10337
  • Turn, and face the Strange Ch Ch Changes...D Bowie
Re: About RTP
« Reply #47 on: June 13, 2019, 01:21:55 PM »
Still, RTP is invaluable to get the general shape and layout of clouds right, I can't imagine working without it anymore, it has save me hours of test renders on every single project.

Oh yes!!!

echo!
something borrowed,
something Blue.
Ring out the Old.
Bring in the New
Bobby Stahr, Paracosmologist

Offline masonspappy

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1973
  • "I am my own worst-case scenario"
Re: About RTP
« Reply #48 on: June 13, 2019, 03:39:32 PM »
Still, RTP is invaluable to get the general shape and layout of clouds right, I can't imagine working without it anymore, it has save me hours of test renders on every single project.

Oh yes!!!

echo!

Amen!!

Offline WASasquatch

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3225
Re: About RTP
« Reply #49 on: June 13, 2019, 05:01:43 PM »
So, to summarize, I disagree on the quality of AA you claim still. If you did an exact export of the RTP, and than a same resolution standard rendered and difference them, there would be a whole lot of polygon and square shapes, that difference being from the lesser of the quality images -- the RTP...

You do realize that anything using displacement is only derived from the OpenGL preview and does not use the same polygon detail that the final renderer uses? It's clear that RTP can't deliver the same displacement quality that way, and it is not meant to do so currently.

As for clouds, I partially agree. RTP clouds sometimes differ in density and most of the time shadowing and GI and thus the general look can look entirely different. This is by design, too, but I wish we had a way to tweak the way RTP degrades clouds. I would happily trade a few seconds of time saved in RTP for a result closer to what the final render looks like.
Still, RTP is invaluable to get the general shape and layout of clouds right, I can't imagine working without it anymore, it has save me hours of test renders on every single project.

Than it is not as described. Rename it the Somewhat Example of Real-time Cloud Preview.

It's not accurate for shadows and lighting, and It's not accurate for shapes a lot of the time....

And if it's not good for surfaces like explained is a direct use of it, in the beginning, that just leaves clouds. If it can't provide accurate shadowing and lighting for geometry it's innacurate, not an approximation. Inherenrly. So is it's only use is bare plains and very very distant mountains? Lmao

Why is it the nature of the RTP is being ignored for one little feature like a fucking cloud!? This is certainly not it's only use, from release, to now. And it inherently shouldn't be it's only goal or use, and most certainly can see improvement. Especially if we're already waiting on times beyond a standard render at MPD0.5 AA2. It'd nice to see improvement in processing time there too considering the base preview it's working off of is by magnitudes less detailed than the actual render. Why can't it apply the same logic in the renderer that takes far less time? Seems like things to think about to me. Always areas to improve and when things are like this, definite areas to improve. It's no question. Not a area of objective opinion. It's a design standpoint and you know what I'm talking about Matt.

Affirming reasons it should t have been released isn't helping any disposition. Especially the blatant ass kissing. Especially people that have admitted they don't even use the RTP in the past (Bobby).

Clearly the RTP. Changes the geometry entirely from.polygons to AA squares and is capable of much more.  Erroneous shadows and lighting can't be by design or there is a serious lack of interest to realism and workflow.

Getting pretty pissed off to the ignorance to what's right in front of you in every image over a opinion of one little facet of the whole system

Matt / Oshyan I do not want any of my assets appearing on Planetside in any packages, and I'd like to know if you two would be able to remove my account and all posts at my in the future or if there would be issue?
« Last Edit: June 13, 2019, 05:47:21 PM by WASasquatch »

Offline cyphyr

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4032
    • richardfraser
Re: About RTP
« Reply #50 on: June 13, 2019, 06:26:36 PM »
If it is not as described then maybe the solution would be to give it a different description?

We have shown that it is useful, that it can give a good indication of textures and clouds in a VERY short amount of time.

If your complaint is that it is not as fast or as accurate as other software previews then although that may indeed be true and valid it still dose not take away the fact that it is faster than, and more useful than the standard Terragen preview.

Would you be happier if Planetside removed the name "Realtime" or "Texture", or "Preview" from its name?
It may not *technically* be a Real Time Preview but it is beyond me why you can't see that it is both useful and faster than the standard preview.
If you don't want to use it in the most efficient way then that is a limitation that you are imposing yourself.

Whilst one *can* compare elements of different software to each other I don't find it very productive.  One is comparing things that are essentially different, apples with bananas, interesting but not particularly useful.

Definitely RTP is in need of improvement as is every aspect of every program.  All software is in a constant state of evolution (except MS Word, that is just devolving back to primal soup).

It would be a shame to see you go, you have added a lot to our little community.
www.richardfraser.co.uk
https://www.facebook.com/RichardFraserVFX/
/|\

i7 5930K @3.5Ghz, 32Gb (TG4 benchmark 13.44)
i7 980 @3.75Ghz, 16Gb (TG4 benchmark 18:40)

Offline WASasquatch

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3225
Re: About RTP
« Reply #51 on: June 13, 2019, 06:44:35 PM »
If it is not as described then maybe the solution would be to give it a different description?

We have shown that it is useful, that it can give a good indication of textures and clouds in a VERY short amount of time.

If your complaint is that it is not as fast or as accurate as other software previews then although that may indeed be true and valid it still dose not take away the fact that it is faster than, and more useful than the standard Terragen preview.

Would you be happier if Planetside removed the name "Realtime" or "Texture", or "Preview" from its name?
It may not *technically* be a Real Time Preview but it is beyond me why you can't see that it is both useful and faster than the standard preview.
If you don't want to use it in the most efficient way then that is a limitation that you are imposing yourself.

Whilst one *can* compare elements of different software to each other I don't find it very productive.  One is comparing things that are essentially different, apples with bananas, interesting but not particularly useful.

Definitely RTP is in need of improvement as is every aspect of every program.  All software is in a constant state of evolution (except MS Word, that is just devolving back to primal soup).

It would be a shame to see you go, you have added a lot to our little community.

Speed would be entirely irrelevant if that results are not accurate, wouldn't you agree? Regardless of speed, if you relied on the RTP you'd have serious QC issues. That's just inherent to it's level of quality and how it draws shadows and lighting. You won't be rendering the same scene, especially on a detail level. So you might as well just crop render to what you're specifically interested in seeing, which WILL be faster than the RTP's iterations on top of the normal preview getting finished. Sorry, that's just how it is. And you'll likely be making changes to your scene causing the whole RTP to reset anyway (emphasizing cloud-only usage really). The only benefit is when it's done, but again the model has issues for actual approximation of the final scene, and your cloud settings, let alone all the surface lighting and texture issues which is one of it's advertised uses.

Offline cyphyr

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4032
    • richardfraser
Re: About RTP
« Reply #52 on: June 13, 2019, 06:48:44 PM »
Well I usually crop the RTP area I want to preview anyway so no it wion't be faster.
I don't agree that the results need to be accurate. They need to be "good enough" for me to judge weather I'm going in the right direction or not and to do so quickly.
Accuracy comes later and then I will be doing crop renders.

For me (YMMV) the whole point of RTP is getting to a point quickly where I can start to use the full renderer and this I find it does very well. Hopefully in the future it will do it better :)
www.richardfraser.co.uk
https://www.facebook.com/RichardFraserVFX/
/|\

i7 5930K @3.5Ghz, 32Gb (TG4 benchmark 13.44)
i7 980 @3.75Ghz, 16Gb (TG4 benchmark 18:40)

Offline Oshyan

  • Planetside Staff
  • *
  • Posts: 13097
  • Holy snagging ducks!
Re: About RTP
« Reply #53 on: June 13, 2019, 06:50:14 PM »
Despite our differences, I'd be sad to see you go given some of the nice contributions you've made here. But of course we can remove your account if you wish, and we won't post your assets (acknowledging that you are revoking permission recently granted). Your post content here would remain as it is in context of discussions that many other people participated in and, having posted it publicly, it is user generated content that is now part of the public record. All personally identifying information would be removed, of course. This is in compliance with current US and EU GDPR privacy standards.

Let us know if you'd like us to proceed with your account removal.

- Oshyan

Offline WASasquatch

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3225
Re: About RTP
« Reply #54 on: June 13, 2019, 06:50:52 PM »
Well I usually crop the RTP area I want to preview anyway so no it wion't be faster.
I don't agree that the results need to be accurate. They need to be "good enough" for me to judge weather I'm going in the right direction or not and to do so quickly.
Accuracy comes later and then I will be doing crop renders.

For me (YMMV) the whole point of RTP is getting to a point quickly where I can start to use the full renderer and this I find it does very well. Hopefully in the future it will do it better :)

The RTP processing is inherently slower than the standard render, full or cropped. Lol been timed on many machines now. And still ignoring key points for opinions. Ugh.

Offline cyphyr

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4032
    • richardfraser
Re: About RTP
« Reply #55 on: June 13, 2019, 06:54:16 PM »
Are you measuring until the render is finished?
Because I never wait that long for either RTP or standard.
www.richardfraser.co.uk
https://www.facebook.com/RichardFraserVFX/
/|\

i7 5930K @3.5Ghz, 32Gb (TG4 benchmark 13.44)
i7 980 @3.75Ghz, 16Gb (TG4 benchmark 18:40)

Offline WASasquatch

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3225
Re: About RTP
« Reply #56 on: June 13, 2019, 07:01:31 PM »
Despite our differences, I'd be sad to see you go given some of the nice contributions you've made here. But of course we can remove your account if you wish, and we won't post your assets (acknowledging that you are revoking permission recently granted). Your post content here would remain as it is in context of discussions that many other people participated in and, having posted it publicly, it is user generated content that is now part of the public record. All personally identifying information would be removed, of course. This is in compliance with current US and EU GDPR privacy standards.

Let us know if you'd like us to proceed with your account removal.

- Oshyan

You require a user signed T&C (of those conditions), which your conditions do not cover, in fact, they grant me full responsibility and ownership as author. The forum, staff, and owner, is not responsible and has no ownership of the posts.

Quote from: Planetside Forums T&C
Note that it is impossible for the staff or the owners of this forum to confirm the validity of posts. Please remember that we do not actively monitor the posted messages, and as such, are not responsible for the content contained within. We do not warrant the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information presented. The posted messages express the views of the author, and not necessarily the views of this forum, its staff, its subsidiaries, or this forum's owner. Anyone who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to notify an administrator or moderator of this forum immediately. The staff and the owner of this forum reserve the right to remove objectionable content, within a reasonable time frame, if they determine that removal is necessary. This is a manual process, however, please realize that they may not be able to remove or edit particular messages immediately. This policy applies to member profile information as well.

You remain solely responsible for the content of your posted messages. Furthermore, you agree to indemnify and hold harmless the owners of this forum, any related websites to this forum, its staff, and its subsidiaries. The owners of this forum also reserve the right to reveal your identity (or any other related information collected on this service) in the event of a formal complaint or legal action arising from any situation caused by your use of this forum.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2019, 07:03:35 PM by WASasquatch »

Offline WASasquatch

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3225
Re: About RTP
« Reply #57 on: June 13, 2019, 07:13:15 PM »
Are you measuring until the render is finished?
Because I never wait that long for either RTP or standard.

As noted over and over, quality is my concern, the whole point of actual renders. The RTP doesn't help with this process in it's current form. The basic previews locations of shadows and lighting is an approximation enough, the RTP doesn't help with actual cloud settings of density, and shapes within shadows to a real helpful degree, agian where you might as well just render a crop or full render, which will be quicker than the RTP iterations to completion (to a relative higher quality state), but again the difference is so negligible to the actual final product it's of no real help, especially outside of clouds. Expecting users to not use a feature to completion because of an opinion of just stopping it when you are satisfied is not conducive with the technical side and development, and especially other people where opinions are subjective.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2019, 07:15:22 PM by WASasquatch »

Offline archonforest

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3979
  • !AMIGA RULEZ!
Re: About RTP
« Reply #58 on: June 13, 2019, 07:25:37 PM »
I just did some RTP test on an I7-6700 cpu to try to understand what is problem here. Here is what I found out as a simple user:

- RTP is not very useful when u want to preview procedural content. It is slow and the picture is not really accurate. BUT it gives some data that might be enough for some people so they can see fast how things are going.

-RTP is very useful and very fast to view objects.

My scenes are obj heavy thus RTP is a blessing for my work.
Dell T5500 with Dual Hexa Xeon CPU 3Ghz, 32Gb ram
Amiga 1200 8Mb ram, 8Gb ssd

Offline WASasquatch

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3225
Re: About RTP
« Reply #59 on: June 13, 2019, 07:29:11 PM »
I just did some RTP test on an I7-6700 cpu to try to understand what is problem here. Here is what I found out as a simple user:

- RTP is not very useful when u want to preview procedural content. It is slow and the picture is not really accurate. BUT it gives some data that might be enough for some people so they can see fast how things are going.

-RTP is very useful and very fast to view objects.

My scenes are obj heavy thus RTP is a blessing for my work.

I will agree heavily with objects. They look great, but they are just objects being rendered individually based on lighting environment. The non-lighted shaded versions in regular preview look great too, though. Just not the best lighting judgement at all.

You can literally crank down MPD and still have highly detailed objects lighted with a substantially lower render time.

For me, at least, objects render the quickest all around in TG because they are very pre-defined.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2019, 07:49:03 PM by WASasquatch »