|
|
Dribble problems?
About Truespace Archives
These pages are a copy of the official truespace forums prior to their removal somewhere around 2011.
They are retained here for archive purposes only.
Dribble problems? // Roundtable
Post by splinters // Nov 10, 2007, 5:01am
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
I am having Dribble crash on me repeatedly today and all last night.
I am trying to render a very simple scene at 3200x1600. It has no HDRI but uses GI at intesity 0.75 and samples 25.
I get a ts crash everytime I try to do this anywhere between 1% and 50% done...never seems to be the same twice but it always crashes.
Last night I did manage a render at 1600x800 but that was lucky. Seems I can only render the window size without a crash.
I vaguely remember some mention of large renders crashing but cannot find the post. Is this a known problem?
Please help, I can't finish this image with a 800x400 render...:( |
Post by Emmanuel // Nov 10, 2007, 8:42am
|
Emmanuel
Total Posts: 439
|
Did you checked your memory use ?
It seems that Dribble suffers the same issue we have with Lightworks : beyond 2Gb, trueSpace freezes and we must kill/restart tS. |
Post by jamesmc // Nov 10, 2007, 9:17am
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
I wish there were more software designers that included "shredders" in their software.
For example, just the time I've spent online last night and today, I was able to shred 54 mb of useless temp files and overhead.
This 'shredding' dramatically increases my computer performance.
Other 3D software and some 2D image programs have the same problem. That is, they fail to release memory and temp files. |
Post by splinters // Nov 10, 2007, 9:58am
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
Mmmm, I must look at the memory use...damn shame though...:( |
Post by splinters // Nov 10, 2007, 2:05pm
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
Mmmm...interesting.
I rendered at 3200x1600 and it crashed at about 20%. CPU usage peaked at 100% a lot and ram slowly crept up to 1.9 gb before it crashed.
managed a 1600x800 render but Ram was nearly at 1.9gb throughout and cpu at nearly 100% for most of the time.
Weird thing is, this rendered at 800x600 in about a minute but twice the size took about 20-25 mins....and , yes, I turned raytrace depth down to 2.
Really struggled with this today and made little progress as a result...:o |
Post by Jack Edwards // Nov 10, 2007, 2:57pm
|
Jack Edwards
Total Posts: 4062
|
32 bit apps can't allocate more than 2 GB. So you have met the 32-bit barrier and it can only be solved by going 64bit and having more ram. Unfortunately TS via Dribble can't interface with the 64-bit version of 3Delight.
The work around is to render the image in chunks and then put the pieces back together in a paint program. Maybe Simon can write something that will automate the process...? |
Post by SiW // Nov 10, 2007, 9:13pm
|
SiW
Total Posts: 298
|
As has been mentioned, the 2gb limit is almost definitely the cause. What sort of scene are you rendering here? Heavy textures? Heavy geometry?
James - while I know what you're saying and agree with you, if a task is going to take more than 2gb to perform, you are always going to run into problems in a 32-bit architecture, it's not the developer's fault. |
Post by splinters // Nov 11, 2007, 2:52am
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
This is the scene; two trees and some grass. nothing too heavy and just a displacement texture on the bark and for the leaves.
I don't want to sound rude but if I cannot render something this simple at 3200x1600 then dribble will just become a novel toy for experimenting with materials...but I have faith that it can be fixed or that i have some setting wrong...this was set to raytrace depth 2.
S'funny, it will render at 800x400 (size of render window) fine but larger causes me problems. |
Post by Jack Edwards // Nov 11, 2007, 10:07am
|
Jack Edwards
Total Posts: 4062
|
It's likely related to displacement mapping and the size of your textures.
What you need is something like this for dribble:
http://forums1.caligari.com/truespace/showthread.php?t=528
;)
-Jack. |
Post by SiW // Nov 11, 2007, 12:24pm
|
SiW
Total Posts: 298
|
I don't want to sound rude but if I cannot render something this simple
Not rude at all (and I wouldn't take it personally anyway, it's the renderer, not dribble) - I understand your concerns and they're valid - but I disagree that this is a simple scene, at least from the renderer's point of view. Let me explain.
REYES renderers (of which 3Delight is one, and Pixar's own PRMan is another) don't care for raytracing. It goes against everything they stand for, really. They get their memory efficiency from being able to discard objects when they've been rendered. The minute you start introducing rays, you have to keep everything around in memory because you never know what's going to be needed in a reflection, a shadow calculation, etc. This is a huge issue when you start using displaced surfaces, because the final displaced surface has to be generated before rendering can even begin, with potentially the equivalent of millions (billions!) of polygons, and it has to stay in memory until the last bucket is rendered. That's why there's a flag to say "don't raytrace displaced objects", but in the general case you can't use it because of the obvious discrepency between the object silhouette and shadows or reflections etc. Using heavily displaced surfaces with raytracing is simply not recommended.
Now these days we want to use effects that have traditionally only been possible with raytracing, such as color bleeding. Whenever the new version of 3Delight is publically released, it should be possible to use the new point-based occlusion to calculate global illumination without tracing any rays. This should give us the best of both worlds.
As for other things we can do, we can try the rendering in segments (which I need to implement anyway for a "render area" tool) but I'm not convinced it will have an effect on memory usage with displaced surfaces.
Btw, is there SSS in use on the leaves there too? |
Post by splinters // Nov 11, 2007, 1:12pm
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
Strangely there is no SSS on the leaves although it appears to have that effect...:o
Thanks for the replies Simon. |
Post by splinters // Nov 14, 2007, 3:45am
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
Just tried this on my lowly laptop and it killed it. Seems the main problem here is the GI coupled with the displacement. I can render without the GI on with no problem...:o
Not sure if that helps at all...but it doesn't help me render this scene...:( |
|
