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

#41 dataflow

dataflow

    Cafe Master Blaster

  • Regular Member
  • 12,074 posts
  • C4D Version:16 Studio
  • Location: sydney

Posted 27 September 2008 - 05:18 AM

that sentence is to different statements.

maybe they should have seperated them so people dont confuse the 2

statement 1 : new global illumination render engine

statement 2 : and dramatically improved render speed.

render speeds are faster (not for GI)

and im not saying that A3 is perfect and bug free (because its not)

Dataflow Donations C4D beta tester


#42 paulselhi

paulselhi

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

  • Regular Member
  • 4,670 posts
  • C4D Version:15 Studio
  • Location: London England

Posted 27 September 2008 - 06:42 AM

As i mentioned earlier, since gi prepass only occurs on one machine effectively.. the first one that finishes calculation provides the solution for the farm. It would seem logical that for farm work it would be better to use a brute force approach with no precalc thus having all the nodes kicking off at once. Of course this would have to be worked out considering the time taken to precalcand the number of nodes available for render. But a precalc that takes several days maybe be waisting time when you could perhaps get a better and faster BF render with enough nodes

Take a hard render example where each frame in BF takes 1 hour to render. On a 1000 frame render with 20 nodes in a farm that would have a finished render in 3000 mins

A 3 day prepass ( not unreasonable for high settings) is 4300 mins + the final rendering of each frame

Of course if you happen to have a 32 core machine that could be used for the prepass plus a 100 node render farm you are a happy bunny.. and probably using Houdini !!!

Edited by paulselhi, 27 September 2008 - 06:52 AM.


#43 Guest_TheFallen_*

Guest_TheFallen_*
  • Guests

Posted 27 September 2008 - 07:41 AM

To try and get a solution to this, we've tried splitting the current scene into 5 cuts (which was a pain as it's one continuous shot) The files were then saved incrementally with the frame ranges adjusted for each cut (0-305, 306-481, etc.) and farmed each file to the nodes. So that each one is pre-passing a section thus cutting the time by five.

We were hoping to combine the GI results into a master folder and use that as the master solution for the final Net render. But instead of creating a solution for each frame relative to it's frame number... i.e. frames 0-300 would have a solution file 'frame(0-300).gi'... cinema creates a file with a frame number relative to the current render. So each illum folder for each of the renders has results that are named incrementally 'frame(0-???).gi' so there's no hope of combining the results for one final NR solution. Which is a bummer to say the least.

http://www.c4dcafe.com/ipb/public/style_emoticons/default/sad.gif

Each node is just gonna have to chunk though the pre-pass and render each cut all on it's lonesome, with After Effects coming to the rescue by the looks of it...

#44 gregg2597

gregg2597

    Gregg2597

  • Regular Member
  • 811 posts
  • C4D Version:13 Studio
  • Location: USA novato ca

Posted 27 September 2008 - 10:57 AM

This is I guess would be AR1. I put this simple scene together for testing. A sphere rolling around on a plane with a stationary object.

Attached Thumbnails

  • rad10.jpg

Attached Files



#45 dataflow

dataflow

    Cafe Master Blaster

  • Regular Member
  • 12,074 posts
  • C4D Version:16 Studio
  • Location: sydney

Posted 27 September 2008 - 12:50 PM

This is I guess would be AR1. I put this simple scene together for testing. A sphere rolling around on a plane with a stationary object.



if your going to test a renderer you really need all different types of materials in scene (i know your not testing materials but they have a big effect on animation render quality)
its not that hard to get a white material scene to look good

Edited by dataflow, 27 September 2008 - 12:51 PM.

Dataflow Donations C4D beta tester


#46 gregg2597

gregg2597

    Gregg2597

  • Regular Member
  • 811 posts
  • C4D Version:13 Studio
  • Location: USA novato ca

Posted 28 September 2008 - 07:18 AM

Yea, your right Dataflow. Just a basic where do I start kinda settings to use for AR. To much one way and you get long renfer times, not enough and you get flckering. I did notice ( at least with my version) I have to flush the illumnation casche. And the materials are the basic materials with a little reflection.

#47 srek

srek
  • Regular Member
  • 3,676 posts
  • C4D Version:16 Studio
  • Location: Germany Friedrichsdorf Hessen

Posted 28 September 2008 - 11:30 AM

The Fallen:
What is written on the MAXON website:
"CINEMA 4D R11 highlights include a non-linear animation system, new global illumination render engine and dramatically
improved render speed. "

What you read:
"CINEMA 4D R11 highlights include a non-linear animation system, new global illumination render engine with dramatically
improved render speed. "

"AR3 provides the flexibility to get the realism you need without spending hours tweaking settings or days waiting for frames to finish."
This sentence is mainly about ease of use and secondly about the now practicaly linear calculation time for frames in GI animations, instead of the sometimes exponentialy increasing time with 10.5 GI.

MAXON is extremely cautious about what is claimed and the above sentences don't offer any interpretations like the ones you read into them.
In fact MAXON marketing has often been accused by customers to not be agressive enough ;)

Cheers
Bjorn

#48 StCanas

StCanas

    This is not me...

  • Supporter's Club Silver
  • 4,486 posts
  • Location: England

Posted 28 September 2008 - 11:45 AM

That first sentence is ambiguous to say the least.

Cheers
Karl

#49 3DKiwi

3DKiwi

    Cafe Founder

  • Admin
  • 41,706 posts
  • C4D Version:16 Studio
  • Location: Feilding, New Zealand

Posted 28 September 2008 - 12:02 PM

This page here about render speeds on MAXON's site makes interesting reading.

What I'm finding is rendering without GI is noticeably quicker in R11 as confirmed by the speed tests done by MAXON. For me rendering with GI in R11 is usually slower but the result is a lot better and there is a lot less tweaking / test renders required. For still images this is great and if the render takes another 5 minutes because of the new GI then so be it. I'm still finding animation rendering with GI still too slow to be of much use. It's doable but you have to leave your machine rendering overnight or all day while you're out out work.

3DKiwi

www.3dkiwi.co.nz - My personal site    My Cinema 4D Vimeo channel


#50 3DKiwi

3DKiwi

    Cafe Founder

  • Admin
  • 41,706 posts
  • C4D Version:16 Studio
  • Location: Feilding, New Zealand

Posted 28 September 2008 - 12:58 PM

The caching allows you make minor changes e.g. change the colours of your materials and rerender without the need to recalculate the GI.

3DKiwi

www.3dkiwi.co.nz - My personal site    My Cinema 4D Vimeo channel


#51 Guest_TheFallen_*

Guest_TheFallen_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 September 2008 - 01:04 PM

We finally managed to get some output using the preview range batch rendering I mentioned earlier, but only after many pains in the bum, and some very long hours (and hot processors!).

Sad really, but we were looking forward to using the new GI in our pipeline but it's just not viable at these speeds.

Bjorn:
I think instead of a grammar lesson (impressed that you could tell how I read the sentence btw http://www.c4dcafe.com/ipb/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif ), it would be better that MAXON instructed their reps to reply "No" or "Not really" when asked if the dramatically improved render speed included the AR3 GI system with object animation (as we did before we upgraded). Or better still put a disclaimer on it's marketing/website stating that this is the case. As the sentence is ambiguous and that coupled with the inaccurate advice from the rep has left us feeling disappointed. As it was the deciding factor when we purchased the new upgrade licenses.

Don't get me wrong on this though. It's a great product and we've have been more than impressed with the speed and quality of the GI for stills and camera animations. But our need lies more with a faster (and therefor more cost effective) GI object animation solution, which we thought we were getting.

#52 Horganovski

Horganovski

    Toon in:Power on:Ease out

  • Moderators
  • 9,913 posts
  • C4D Version:15 Studio
  • Location: Ireland

Posted 28 September 2008 - 01:59 PM

I've had my fair share of grumbles about R11 both here and over on CGTalk, but I wonder in this case are people expecting too much of the GI system?

I read on the Aix Sponza topic over on CGTalk that they used a render farm of over 40 8 core Mac pros to render the Formula One commercial they made recently and while it looks very impressive I'm not sure they even used GI on it. I've read that the likes of Pixar etc have only recently started using GI, generally things are faked instead using bounce lights. Considering the size of the render farm they must have you'd think if GI was a realistic proposition for animation they would have been using it for a lot longer.

I could be wrong on this, I'm definitely not a GI guru and I don't even have AR yet, but I have seen the 'twice as fast' rendering working on my own machine - I tested a scene with the save enabled R11 demo that used the MoGraph Skylight plugin (an advanced light dome setup basically) and I saw times per frame go from 4min38 in 10.5 to 2min 32 in 11 (Quad core PC 2.83 ghz).

Cheers,
Brian

#53 srek

srek
  • Regular Member
  • 3,676 posts
  • C4D Version:16 Studio
  • Location: Germany Friedrichsdorf Hessen

Posted 28 September 2008 - 11:06 PM

>I think instead of a grammar lesson (impressed that you could tell how I read the sentence btw smiley2.gif ),
Ah, it was pretty obvious, wasn't it ;)

> it would be better that MAXON instructed their reps to reply "No" or "Not really" when asked if the dramatically improved render speed included the AR3 GI system with object animation (as we did before we upgraded).

The problem is mainly that there is no single straight forward answer to this. If you follow the discussions on the new GI here and on other forums you can see that many people who simply take old GI scens, slap on the new GI and render experience a slow down. However if you take the time to actualy dive into the new GI and create a new setup you often experience a speed advantage. The two biggest timesavers the new GI offers are not connected to renderspeed however, they are ease of use and the simply way better quality that allows for much shorter setup times since you don't need nearly as many testrenderings as with the old one.
The biggest speed advantage of the new GI over the old one is the now predictable and useable speed for animation renderings (as i pointed out before).

So over all yes, AR 3 is faster than the old AR, but the reason for this is not obvious immediately.

Cheers
Bjorn

#54 paulselhi

paulselhi

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

  • Regular Member
  • 4,670 posts
  • C4D Version:15 Studio
  • Location: London England

Posted 29 September 2008 - 01:30 PM

Here is an interesting render 4 hours on a dual core 2.4 ghz, no lights just the hdri. I switched off caustics in the gi setings but i am not sure what is causing the caustic like effects from the glass on the floor. I have the glass set to not receive gi but to generate gi, maybe it is that. anyway the effect is not to bad

some ao for the floor and some blurry relections on the box which is not really obvious plus some vector motion blur

http://www.black-and-white-to-color.com/st...botsmashr11.mov

#55 theinfomercial

theinfomercial

    No idea what to write here....

  • Regular Member
  • 1,413 posts
  • C4D Version:12 (or older)
  • Location: Happy Land!!!

Posted 29 September 2008 - 02:01 PM

How did you pull off the physics? :O
I recommend you turn around....immediately if possible.....

#56 paulselhi

paulselhi

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

  • Regular Member
  • 4,670 posts
  • C4D Version:15 Studio
  • Location: London England

Posted 29 September 2008 - 02:37 PM

silverbullet

#57 theinfomercial

theinfomercial

    No idea what to write here....

  • Regular Member
  • 1,413 posts
  • C4D Version:12 (or older)
  • Location: Happy Land!!!

Posted 29 September 2008 - 03:14 PM

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

#58 Marijn

Marijn
  • Regular Member
  • 177 posts
  • C4D Version:15 Studio

Posted 03 October 2008 - 01:36 AM

I also had issues with object animation. For example, I wanted to use Full Animation GI on this animation, but after a pretty long prepass time, I still got very, very poor results (flickering due to inaccurate GI). Boosting up the settings would probably have solved this, but that would have taken way too long. When using basic QMC, the render was not only much faster, but also a lot better (which is what you see in the animation). Unfortunately, QMC is not always the best way to go, because the stronger your luminance is, the more noise you get. So with heavy light, QMC is pretty useless.

Strangely enough, using light animation does work fine. Check this movie, which was created with Full Animation and had a very short prepass time. Surely that's a great improvement compared to the ugly R10 version.

Overall I think MAXON either rushed the full animation, or just pumped in a lot of extra passes to avoid flickering and thus angry customers. I hope they will improve this in the next upgrade, because it should be possible to prepass much faster.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users