Well here it is, my continuation of the Ground Cover Mashup (http://forums.planetside.co.uk/index.php?topic=6122.0) and Walk in the Woods (http://forums.planetside.co.uk/index.php?topic=5982.0) renders.
Wild Garlic and Bluebells
Vital stasts:
13 populations ranging from approx 50 to 1.5mil
750x1000
3h49m
0.9 ~ 10 ~ 2 ~ 2 ~ 4
SubDiv Cache ~ 600Mb
2 x enviro lights (AO & GI)
I'm quite happy with this one but I would like to push it further, more variety, more detail ... but I had to trim back to the above settings to avoid raytrace errors and it would of course be nice with light rays streaming through the trees but life really is too short for that kind of wait lol
Anyway Comments and Crits welcome as always.
Thanks for looking
richard
Wow. The more I look at this, the more I like it. At first, it seemed too hazy or not sharp enough. But, as I looked it over a few times, it began to pop out.
I love the detail in the forground, but as I look back into the image the realism fades away somewhat...I think it's the trees. However, excellent work on the groundcover!
Yeah, the foreground is absolute gold, a photograph. The trees, however, are offputting... I think it's the branches..
:) Awesome work !
Fantastic! How long did you say was it rendering? ;D
Very nice indeed. What was the reason you used a cache size of 600MB?
- Oshyan
Hi
Realy wonderful!
Only the trees are al little bit 'zackig' (zig zag sorry I don't know the english word).
ciao
Naoo
Thanks for the feedback guys, yeah I agree about the trees, kinda a filler that I never got around to fixing, maybe I'll concentrate on that later.
Render time was only 3.59 hours, not too bad for such a complex scene.
I set the subdiv cache to a size of 600MB as part of trying to fix some traceRay? rayTrace? errors that resulted in skipped and unfinished buckets, I also dropped the detail and AA from max and put some of the plants on "High Quality" rather than "Very High Quality" so any of the above could have fixed the render problem.
:)
richard
Generally speaking *lowering* the cache size is what will help as those kinds of errors usually indicate memory limitations. Increasing cache size uses *more* memory and can actually create problems. Until TG2 goes 64 bit (and you're using it on a 64 bit OS) I don't recommend changing cache sizes.
- Oshyan
OK I did wonder if I should have lowered the cache but my reasoning was that with 400mb cache and 4 cores I'd be using 1600 mb of memory so with 13 populations and their associated image maps I figured it would be wise to take advantage of the extra 1400mb of unused ram (I have 8 gig but I'm assuming TG2 will only use up to 3.2gig (ish). Not wanting to push the issue I "split the difference" and settled for the middle ground. 600Mb cache on 4 cores giving a total 2400mb cache.
Obviously I have misunderstood the whole cache issue.
:)
richard
Yes, actually the cache is *split* amongst all the cores. You are specifying the *total* size of the cache. So with 4 cores at 400MB, it's 100MB per core/thread. Unless you're running on OSX, a 64 bit version of Windows, or have the /3GB switch turned on in 32 bit Windows, TG2 can only use 2GB of RAM max (like every other 32 bit app). With the /3GB switch it can use up to 3GB. With 64 bit it can use up to 4GB. But still the philosophy that you "might as well increase the cache to make use of the 'unused' memory" doesn't actually result in any measurable benefit, and generally increases the likelihood of memory-related issues. You can't always know how much memory your scene will use. So the default is strongly recommended, and changing it is only usually desirable in troubleshooting cases.
- Oshyan
Cheers, oh I just remembered the other reason, when I initially dropped the cache to 200MB I got a warning that the cache may be too low and may result in performance issues (something like that), I tried it at 2500mb, 300mb and 350mb and still got the same error message, so then I figured the logic (illogical!) above :)
richard
Agree re the foreground - superb; and also that the realism fades a little in the background.
Yes, the warning kicks in when you have less than 100MB per core. Since you have 4 cores, anything less than the default will trigger the warning. However the warning is based on assumed potential issues of performance with low cache sizes, it is not a particularly serious warning state, generally speaking. Of course you should try to avoid small cache sizes as well, when possible, and the default of 400MB is fine on a quad core system.
- Oshyan
Quote from: Oshyan on April 23, 2009, 03:12:06 PM
With 64 bit it can use up to 4GB.
Is it still "only" 4GB under 64 Bit? That would really frustrate me if it turned out to be correct :-\
Quote from: MacGyver on April 24, 2009, 02:39:29 PM
Quote from: Oshyan on April 23, 2009, 03:12:06 PM
With 64 bit it can use up to 4GB.
Is it still "only" 4GB under 64 Bit? That would really frustrate me if it turned out to be correct :-\
Until we get a 64bit installer yes, limited to the 4gb mark. Though if i recall correctly 64bit is on the high priority list after release, which just happened... sooo.... 64bit soon :)
Aaah, you mean TG2 in particular, not 64 Bit applications in general! :) I feel much better already ;)
I think and I may stand corrected, but wouldn't porting some thing of the complexity of TG2 be a major under taking? With that in mind I think it could be a major project for the team at Planetside to under take; at the vary least the time scale that it took for multi-threading to be implemented at the outside and with all these things it is best for safety to take that time scale and triple it, as things normally run into delays of one kind or another.
With the aforementioned delays you get all the usual "Wheres our beloved software, why is it taking so long" type threads on these forums, these are of course written by Fan boy's which naturally leads to the moaning and bitching by the other sub-groups that are inclined to follow Fan boy's every where, only because by doing so they thing they'll get more attention in their sad lives and the also think its so cool; these are the geeks, dweebs and associated girls, that I call ladies, now listen up ladies we know where you live!
8) ::)
Regards to you.
Cyber-Angel
I believe its less time required to do a 64bit port then to add multithreading. From what I know it requires a few tweaks, and a recompile for a 64bit binary, but I haven't ever really fully looked into it. Where as multithreading requires reworking a lot of code to be able to run in multiple threads, etc.
I thought we already had multithreading, or are you referring to hyperthreading?
Ah I should read slower, hope we get 64 bit soon!
:)
richard
Yes, it's 4GB per application for 32 bit applications *that have been compiled with "large address space" awareness* (i.e. not all 32 bit apps!). For all other 32 bit apps it's 2GB, even under a 64 bit OS.
Converting to a 64 bit app is non-trivial, but my understanding is it's less of a problem than going multi-threaded. It's not something you should expect "soon", but we've already begun preliminary work on it so at least it's in progress.
- Oshyan
Just following upon the 64bit issue, I know this is not expected soon but can we expect this within the 2.x cycle (ie part of the paid for upgrades) ?
thanks
richard
Hey this is really pretty, I love the light streaming in at the very bottom left. Just a comment from a gardening point of view
- the two patches of white flowers are not repeated anywhere else (you have an uninterrupted field of blue behind - which is usual for a field of bluebells but then why include the white flowers as well and not use elsewhere?)
- is the red stuff in the foreground dirt? if so I have only seen dirt that red in the Aussie outback and in Hawaii - neither of which are known for their bluebells :)
Quote from: cyphyr on April 25, 2009, 05:28:55 AM
Just following upon the 64bit issue, I know this is not expected soon but can we expect this within the 2.x cycle (ie part of the paid for upgrades) ?
thanks
richard
Yes, thats for sure. I believe when planetside says "not soon" they mean a few months, so probably by end of yearish.
64 bit support will be part of the 2.x product and will be a free update for registered users.
- Oshyan
Quote from: cyphyr on April 23, 2009, 02:56:11 PM
OK I did wonder if I should have lowered the cache but my reasoning was that with 400mb cache and 4 cores I'd be using 1600 mb of memory so with 13 populations and their associated image maps I figured it would be wise to take advantage of the extra 1400mb of unused ram (I have 8 gig but I'm assuming TG2 will only use up to 3.2gig (ish). Not wanting to push the issue I "split the difference" and settled for the middle ground. 600Mb cache on 4 cores giving a total 2400mb cache.
Obviously I have misunderstood the whole cache issue.
:)
richard
The subdiv cache is only one part of the renderer - there are many other things that need memory. It's just that the subdiv cache is one of the few things that can be adjusted
if necessary. Allowing Terragen to allocate all of your available memory for just the subdiv cache is a very bad idea. Also, as Oshyan says, the value you enter is the total size shared among all the render threads.
Matt