Results 1 to 15 of 24
Thread: Biggest rendering?
-
12-23-2005, 08:43 PM #1
Biggest rendering?
I am just curious as to the largest size of renderings anyone has completed and how many hours.......... ..............days................................ .........................................or weeks it has taken them. I have a 5072x2464 that has been rendering for about 30 hours now and is only 63% done.
Ryan B. Couse
Architectural Visions
www.couseresidentialdesigns.com
-
12-24-2005, 04:06 AM #2
Ryan,
I assume you mean a ray trace? What happens if after it's done you are not satisifed with it??? That's my one big problem with doing too much ray tracing. It is tough to get all aspects the way you like and it consmes so much time. ANd also ties up the computer!Dennis Gavin CR, CKBR
Gavin Design-Build
Media, PA.
610-353-8890
X5
-
12-24-2005, 05:24 AM #3Registered User Promoted
- Join Date
- Aug 1999
- Posts
- 6,414
Re: Biggest rendering?
Originally posted by Rhinoc
I am just curious as to the largest size of renderings anyone has completed and how many hours.......... ..............days................................ .........................................or weeks it has taken them. I have a 5072x2464 that has been rendering for about 30 hours now and is only 63% done.
size of the model;
complexity of details used in the model(moldings, trims, cabinetry, fixtures, furniture, millwork, etc);
render settings (radiosity, reflectivity, etc) of the various materials used in the model;
render settings when sent to the renderer(radiosity, anti-alliasing, soft shadows, etc)
computer system itself :
cpu, drives, memory (speed, amount, etc), bus speeds of the mobo
what other programs are running in th ebackground, or other work you may be doing while the render takes place...
-
12-24-2005, 05:33 AM #4
Ryan,
I did a large Chief Architect Raytrace rendering ONCE.
It was a 7200x10800 pixel at 300dpi for a 24"x36" construction drawing package cover.
To get the pixel size multiple the print size by the desired dpi. 300dpi is considered good quality for photos.
Raytrace time is a function of your CPU, amount of RAM, the number of lights, bump maps and "random energy in the air".
For my case: 3.2GHZ PIV-HT w/2G RAM. Raytrace settings were High Quality Anti-aliasing and High Quality Radiosity. Sunlight was only light source. The image also had some bump maps for selected materials.
[color=red][size=4]It took 76 hours![/size][/color]
The Pentium IV with HyperThreading really paid off in this job. At least I could keep working on other projects.Don
CA Premium X6 (16.1.1.9x64) SSA
Intel i7-4770 (8M Cache) @ 3.4GHz; Windows 8.1 - 64 Bit; 16GB DDR3 (1600MHz);
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670;
Dual HD Monitors (24" and 22");
Primary Hard Drive: 256GB SSD.
-
12-24-2005, 08:18 AM #5
I think the largest one I ever did was 10,000 x 6,000. It probably took a full day. I'm sure I ran it at low radiosity.
-
12-24-2005, 09:45 AM #6
For this project I had to add some interior lighting to show the art glass windows and I set it for the High Quality Anti-aliasing and High Quality Radiosity as they may blow it up even larger to try to gain more interest ( money) from their congregation.
I definitely agree with Don's statement; "The Pentium IV with HyperThreading really paid off in this job. At least I could keep working on other projects."
By the way 66% done.Ryan B. Couse
Architectural Visions
www.couseresidentialdesigns.com
-
12-25-2005, 06:21 PM #7
I am in the middle of a project that requires 16 renderings (8 Front/Side elevations and 8 Rear/Side elevations)
I am running the Fronts at 1200x900 and the Rears at 800x600. I am including lighting in each shot (typically 6 or so lights per shot). I am still experimenting with radiosity levels (none, low, medium, high) - I have deterimined that AA needs to be at high for what I am doing.
At times no radiosity seems to be fine. Sometimes it is too bright. But, low and meduim radiosity shows too may "artifiacts" (mold) and I am not willing to wait the time necessary for a High Radiosity, High AA, 6 light rendering @ 1200x900 rendering (sometimes 36 hours or more).
I am not sure that I answered your question here, but at least I let you know that there are others out here with the same questions and concerns.
BTW ... I am running my renderings on 3 computers right now. 1) P4 - 3GHZ 1GB RAM - No HT
2) P4 - 3GHZ 512MB RAM - No HT
3) Celeron - 2.8GHZ 512MB RAM
There is a noticable difference in performance between each of the PC's. The biggest step is between the P4 and te Celeron. Just thought you might want to know ...
Zoome.Dan Stauffer
440.221.4281 Mobile
Victor Residential Design and Marketing
Victor Web Design
dws@twinsburg.com
Chief Ver 10.08a, X1
Do I need X2?
-
12-26-2005, 04:51 AM #8Michael Hall, Sequim WA
- Join Date
- Aug 1999
- Location
- SEQUIM WASHINGTON, USA
- Posts
- 391
What monitors are you using?
Prices of each?
5072x2464?
7200x10800?
10,000 x 6,000?
Mike
-
12-26-2005, 04:59 AM #9
Mike,
Who is your question directed towards? or Just a general question ...
ZoomeDan Stauffer
440.221.4281 Mobile
Victor Residential Design and Marketing
Victor Web Design
dws@twinsburg.com
Chief Ver 10.08a, X1
Do I need X2?
-
12-26-2005, 07:38 AM #10Having Fun is Job 1.
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Location
- Carlisle, PA
- Posts
- 1,697
Originally posted by zoome
I am in the middle of a project that requires 16 renderings (8 Front/Side elevations and 8 Rear/Side elevations)
Sounds like Raytracing to me. Renderings don't take more than a few seconds, are video card dependent, and are limited to monitor resolultion. Ray tracing on the other hand uses the CPU, can take days, and can be bigger (pixels x pixels) than the monitor.
Thanks
FitchX2 <latest>
You have until you release the drawing to get it right, Mother Nature and the Customer have forever to see if you did. (By me, 1971. )
For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled. Last sentence in the Feynman Appendix to the Challenger Report by R. Feynman
Never allow those who would substitute intimidation and guilt trips for knowledge and reason to influence your technical judgement. Me, 1993.
-
12-26-2005, 07:52 AM #11
I mean Raytraces.
Dan Stauffer
440.221.4281 Mobile
Victor Residential Design and Marketing
Victor Web Design
dws@twinsburg.com
Chief Ver 10.08a, X1
Do I need X2?
-
12-26-2005, 01:45 PM #12Having Fun is Job 1.
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Location
- Carlisle, PA
- Posts
- 1,697
Originally posted by fitz
What monitors are you using?
Prices of each?
5072x2464?
7200x10800?
10,000 x 6,000?
Mike
The biggest single screen computer monitor I know of is the 30" Apple Cinema-VU which is 2560 x 1600 if I remember right. It costs around $2,500 plus or minus depending on sales, etc.
FitchX2 <latest>
You have until you release the drawing to get it right, Mother Nature and the Customer have forever to see if you did. (By me, 1971. )
For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled. Last sentence in the Feynman Appendix to the Challenger Report by R. Feynman
Never allow those who would substitute intimidation and guilt trips for knowledge and reason to influence your technical judgement. Me, 1993.
-
12-26-2005, 05:20 PM #13Michael Hall, Sequim WA
- Join Date
- Aug 1999
- Location
- SEQUIM WASHINGTON, USA
- Posts
- 391
What monitors are you using?
Fitch - If the largest monitor is 2599 x 1600 as you say, where does the extra resolution come from?
Answer Edited - - OK - I re-read your answer and so that question is answered.
Is anyone using the 30" Apple?
Is there any advantage over using twin 1600x1200 monitors?
I am developing specs for a new system and want to replace my twin mismatched (20"/1600x1200 & 19"/1280x1024) monitors.
I am looking for suggestions.
Good equipment creates higher productivity, so I am prepared to spend a little more for above average equipment.
MikeLast edited by fitz; 12-26-2005 at 05:24 PM.
-
12-26-2005, 08:26 PM #14Having Fun is Job 1.
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Location
- Carlisle, PA
- Posts
- 1,697
Re: What monitors are you using?
Originally posted by fitz
Is anyone using the 30" Apple?
Is there any advantage over using twin 1600x1200 monitors?
The only thing that holds me back is the cost of the Apple monitor + the video card it takes to drive it (about $3K). If I was doing this to make a living I'd have already done it. As a hobby ... oh well, one has to have a dream.
FitchX2 <latest>
You have until you release the drawing to get it right, Mother Nature and the Customer have forever to see if you did. (By me, 1971. )
For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled. Last sentence in the Feynman Appendix to the Challenger Report by R. Feynman
Never allow those who would substitute intimidation and guilt trips for knowledge and reason to influence your technical judgement. Me, 1993.
-
12-26-2005, 09:01 PM #15
Ryan,
The largest raytraces I do for color cover work on prints is 6144x 3495 on the POV Ray v. 3.6 stand-alone. The lines and textures are clear and sharp, so have never needed to go larger for Arch E1 (42x30). The rendering times vary, but the longest I have ever had go is 6 hours and 15 min. This was on a pretty large model with lots of tree shadows on full radiosity and raytrace. I think the single light source helps more than anything on speed. Hope this helps.
Dan
10.07/ XP Pro
AMD 4800-X2 o.c. to 2.64 Ghz/ Nvidia Driver 81.98
2048 mb PC4000 DDRAM/ BFG 7800 GTX o.c.
screen resolutions for this work has been 1280x1024DL Drafting, Sedalia, Missouri
Chief Version X2 12.5.1.9
Windows XP Professional
Liquid Cooled QX9650 Xtreme 3.85 ghz 1800 rated FSB
2 X WD150GB 10000 RPM Raptors RAID 0/
2 X 500 GB WD 7200 RPM RAID 1
Asus P5E3 Deluxe Mainboard with WiFi Ap
XFX Nvidia GeForce 9800 X2 Dual 512 mb Driver 180.48
4 GB Corsair DDR3 - 1333 Mhz RAM
Cooler Master Real Power Pro 1,000 Watt PS