Jump to content




Photo

Anyone Got A Good Ar3 Object Animation Render ?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
57 replies to this topic

#1 paulselhi

paulselhi

    "He should be hung" I think he is Your Majesty

  • Regular Member
  • 4,624 posts
  • C4D Version:15 Studio
  • Location: London England

Posted 19 September 2008 - 09:12 PM

You may recall from an earlier thread that i tried an object animation render that had a lot of problems with AR3 TP and shadows, apart from that the render took 72 hours for around 800 frames. I found R10.5 Sto mode ( brute force) did a great job much faster

But I am only using the demo and would like to see the results of more experienced users with some interesting scenes ( in that i don't mean a spoon falling on a white floor !!)

I found the mutiple passes (14 i think) per frame maddening and incredibly time consuming, hence i though brute force would be even faster ( i did not try BF in r11 as 1. the shadow problem was still there and 2. Well i got thouroughly bored with doing the bloody scene again and again !!

So who has got a good object gi render to show done in AR3, can we have machine specs and render times

#2 Vilandra

Vilandra

    Lead 3D Modeler for the UpThink Lab

  • Regular Member
  • 3,155 posts
  • C4D Version:13 Studio
  • Location: Augusta, GA USA

Posted 19 September 2008 - 09:15 PM

Give me some time, as I have a new machine on the way, and the ill try to put something together....... but can it be done with the demo?

#3 paulselhi

paulselhi

    "He should be hung" I think he is Your Majesty

  • Regular Member
  • 4,624 posts
  • C4D Version:15 Studio
  • Location: London England

Posted 19 September 2008 - 09:17 PM

yes limited to 640 x 480

#4 MJV

MJV
  • Regular Member
  • 103 posts
  • Location: Manhattan

Posted 20 September 2008 - 01:28 PM

I am curious about why you are fixated on the GI portion when it was clearly pointed out to you that it wasn't a GI issue at all, but a TP issue. Anyway, here is a render done with GI full animation that took 80 hours of prerender time on a Dell Dual Xeon 3.2.

http://mvpny.com/R11GITutorial/EggboxMV13MG27mjpeg.mov

The corresponding file is here:

http://mvpny.com/R11GITutorial/EggboxMV13MG27Public.zip

#5 colibert

colibert
  • Regular Member
  • 2,836 posts
  • C4D Version:11.5 (or older)
  • Location: london

Posted 20 September 2008 - 01:56 PM

i posted some stuff in this thread HERE

no real examples, i have a job on that moment, 9 animations for a website, as soon as i can il post some renders, im not a genius with ar by a long shot but ive managed to get rid of the flickering on nearly all of them with fairly low settings, only rendering around 130 frames but clean white shadowy images so it sticks out straight away, only 600 x 300 pixlels but have done a bigger one on a couple and they work just as well, maybe i just cant see it,

heres one, maybe you can see more flickering than i can, this is an earlier one, have done a better one since this, there is a slight jump on this one at the top near the end

mala and lesia44 have seen another one, they both agree its not flickering,

mac 3.2ghz 8 core renders in about twenty minutes, even with all the passes

actually may not be much more taxing than a spoon on a white floor! so maybe not a great example :welcome:

Edited by colibert, 20 September 2008 - 02:07 PM.

My Website - If you spell Chuck Norris in Scrabble, you win. Forever.

#6 Horganovski

Horganovski

    Toon in:Power on:Ease out

  • Moderators
  • 9,849 posts
  • C4D Version:15 Studio
  • Location: Ireland

Posted 20 September 2008 - 02:01 PM

Nice work Colibert, what was the render time on that? (You're running an 8 Core Mac ?)

Cheers,
Brian

#7 colibert

colibert
  • Regular Member
  • 2,836 posts
  • C4D Version:11.5 (or older)
  • Location: london

Posted 20 September 2008 - 02:03 PM

just edited with it, about 20 mins! only one has taken an hour but has really heavy shadows
My Website - If you spell Chuck Norris in Scrabble, you win. Forever.

#8 paulselhi

paulselhi

    "He should be hung" I think he is Your Majesty

  • Regular Member
  • 4,624 posts
  • C4D Version:15 Studio
  • Location: London England

Posted 20 September 2008 - 02:37 PM

I am curious about why you are fixated on the GI portion when it was clearly pointed out to you that it wasn't a GI issue at all, but a TP issue. Anyway, here is a render done with GI full animation that took 80 hours of prerender time on a Dell Dual Xeon 3.2.

http://mvpny.com/R11GITutorial/EggboxMV13MG27mjpeg.mov

The corresponding file is here:

http://mvpny.com/R11GITutorial/EggboxMV13MG27Public.zip


Wheter it is a TP issue or not it IS an AR3 issue as this does not occur with R10.5

Your animation looks good and virtually flicker free but the gi on the walls and especially where it meets the floor is not that good for a 80 hours PP on a dual xeon, what was the final render time ?

Edited by paulselhi, 20 September 2008 - 04:28 PM.


#9 MJV

MJV
  • Regular Member
  • 103 posts
  • Location: Manhattan

Posted 20 September 2008 - 04:55 PM

So even if you know the problem doesn't lie with GI, you have something to gain from repeatedly proclaiming that it does? If you don't practice basic troubleshooting techniques then you are doomed to go around in circles never getting any closer to a solution or a workaround.

Following the prepass the rest of the render takes about 20 or 30 minutes I guess.

#10 paulselhi

paulselhi

    "He should be hung" I think he is Your Majesty

  • Regular Member
  • 4,624 posts
  • C4D Version:15 Studio
  • Location: London England

Posted 20 September 2008 - 05:48 PM

Where exactly in the post do i "repeatedly proclaim " that the problem lies with GI ? I quote

You may recall from an earlier thread that i tried an object animation render that had a lot of problems with AR3 TP and shadows



I'm sorry have i transgressed the rules of the cult of MAXON ? Do you take my mentioning of issues with C4D personaly ?? GI TP AO whatever AR3 HAS a bug. I simply mentioned the scene since it was the only complex scene i have rendered with object animation in ar3 and was not at all impressed with the results

I would love to hear your troubleshooting techniques that would solve that shadow issue ( without a Mograph bake)

And if I find issues with cinema 4d i will mention them when needed..some times the emperor needs to be told about his clothes.

And some times the acolytes need reminding that C4D is just a tool and not beyond critique, it has many plus points and many weaknesses,

Edited by paulselhi, 20 September 2008 - 06:01 PM.


#11 Anthony Owen

Anthony Owen

    Oldest Member

  • Supporter's Club Bronze
  • 3,330 posts
  • C4D Version:12 Prime
  • Location: Humboldt County

Posted 21 September 2008 - 07:55 AM

Pricklyness may be due to marketing interest. Should I splash out for an upgrade before all the complaints are in? I have only recently come to the conclusion that Vista is ok on brand new stuff but not suitable for upgradng XP on older equipment. :welcome:

Edited by Anthony Owen, 21 September 2008 - 07:56 AM.

Win 7, 8 core PC with 12 Gb RAM 64 Bit

#12 MJV

MJV
  • Regular Member
  • 103 posts
  • Location: Manhattan

Posted 22 September 2008 - 03:18 AM

Two people in the original thread you referred to pointed out that the shadow issue in that scene remains even when GI is turned off, and you made two posts in that thread yourself suggesting that the issue lay not with GI, so why post a new thread proclaiming anew that it does? Did you ever try rendering that scene with GI turned off to test it? Takes less then a ten minutes to do. I'm not suggesting you haven't any right to be disappointed that there is a render problem, I'm just curious why you would choose to mischaracterize the issue even after it was clear to anyone who would spend a few minutes rendering your scene without GI that GI wasn't the issue at all. Troubleshooting is always a critical element of success when working with computers and complex software. The scene in question uses TP, Sky, and GI. That means the problem lies in one of three areas or a combination of them. Since the problem remains even when GI is turned off, you can safely rule it out as being the problem. This is troubleshooting 101 and my point is that until you can do that you will simply be going in circles because no software is bug free and the need to properly identify problems and find workarounds when necessary will never go away.

#13 paulselhi

paulselhi

    "He should be hung" I think he is Your Majesty

  • Regular Member
  • 4,624 posts
  • C4D Version:15 Studio
  • Location: London England

Posted 23 September 2008 - 01:28 PM

Again I quote from THIS thread

You may recall from an earlier thread that i tried an object animation render that had a lot of problems with AR3 TP and shadows, apart from that the render took 72 hours for around 800 frames. I found R10.5 Sto mode ( brute force) did a great job much faster


Where in THIS thread do i mention that the shadow issue ( WHICH IS A BUG IN R11) has anything to do with GI ?

You seem to have a fixation with this.. THIS thread was mereley asking to see examples of AR3 GI object animation mode renders

Quite clearly from your above post you think that i have very limited troubleshooting skills with R11, this may well be the case but i don't see what relevance it has to the topic in hand.

However I am sure that if i was on the beta team and had had acess to AR3 for some considerable time I may well have mastered some of the troubleshooting techniques you mention. In fact I may well have used that beta testing time to create a series of FREE tutorials for my FREE website or perhaps fpr a FREE magazine, of course I would have spotted the R11 bug and mentioned it after the NDA expired :biggrin:

Edited by paulselhi, 23 September 2008 - 07:03 PM.


#14 paulselhi

paulselhi

    "He should be hung" I think he is Your Majesty

  • Regular Member
  • 4,624 posts
  • C4D Version:15 Studio
  • Location: London England

Posted 23 September 2008 - 08:45 PM

Here is an old mocca scene rendered in R11 One spot with soft shadows and a normal sky object. rendered in 15 hours on dual core 2.4 ghx 2GB RAM


http://www.black-and-white-to-color.com/stuff/mimer11.mov

#15 paulselhi

paulselhi

    "He should be hung" I think he is Your Majesty

  • Regular Member
  • 4,624 posts
  • C4D Version:15 Studio
  • Location: London England

Posted 23 September 2008 - 09:11 PM

here is another test 1.5 hours

only a normal sky 1 bounce no lights

http://www.black-and-white-to-color.com/stuff/nctut.mov

#16 theinfomercial

theinfomercial

    No idea what to write here....

  • Regular Member
  • 1,413 posts
  • C4D Version:11.5 (or older)
  • Location: Happy Land!!!

Posted 23 September 2008 - 10:19 PM

It appears that you have some good AR3 object animation after all. :thisrocks:

Cool animations. Pretty clean ones too!

Edited by theinfomercial, 23 September 2008 - 10:19 PM.

I recommend you turn around....immediately if possible.....

#17 paulselhi

paulselhi

    "He should be hung" I think he is Your Majesty

  • Regular Member
  • 4,624 posts
  • C4D Version:15 Studio
  • Location: London England

Posted 23 September 2008 - 11:31 PM

yes but these are very simplistic renders, i hope to progress to some more complex stuff as i get the feel for it but my demo will run out in a few days. But i have a spare machine that i can just reformat each time the demo expires !!

#18 paulselhi

paulselhi

    "He should be hung" I think he is Your Majesty

  • Regular Member
  • 4,624 posts
  • C4D Version:15 Studio
  • Location: London England

Posted 25 September 2008 - 05:40 AM

Seems to me that simple scenes will render quite fast, well within our lifetimes, in AR3, the mocca scene above used only one bounce. As you raise the setings though render times increase tremendously. I am try a simple cloth scene at the moment with med-high settings and am at 28 hours on a 2.4 ghz dual at pass 12 of 13 with the final render still ahead

I have tried final render on someone elses machine and must admit that object animation mode is very fast and the results are quite good

#19 paulselhi

paulselhi

    "He should be hung" I think he is Your Majesty

  • Regular Member
  • 4,624 posts
  • C4D Version:15 Studio
  • Location: London England

Posted 25 September 2008 - 08:26 AM

Well FR does not work on Macs as of yet and a lot of pros are maccites. FR suffered earlier from bad reports about such things as DR i think many of the issues were solved but vray has always had a stronger "fan base", maybe the fact that vray for max always had demos in fact it was originally free in a limited form. I do not think FR has demos

Whe FR for C4D was first announced there was much whooping and cheering before anyone had actually used it ( as is usual ) and i think early releases dissapointed many, that coupled with the mac problem has damaged its reputaion perhaps unfairly. I must ask around as to what peple think of the later releases. Actually one of my clients has FR, i often use his machines when i am working at his place ( i even do some tuts on them !!) so next time i am there i will have a closer look at FR

#20 paulselhi

paulselhi

    "He should be hung" I think he is Your Majesty

  • Regular Member
  • 4,624 posts
  • C4D Version:15 Studio
  • Location: London England

Posted 25 September 2008 - 11:29 PM

That announcement is dated 2007-09-12 !! This is the sort of thing that is really annoying the maccites, they have had these "promises" for years now !!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users