Gilles Tran wrote:
> 
> Not a answer to that precise point, but slicing the render into smaller
> chunks (+er0.1, +er0.2 etc.) helps a lot keeping the memory use in check
> for radiosity images. I would never have been able to render 3200*2400 rad
> pics without it (and I've never noticed visible artefacts due to the
> resuming).
> 

I always found such artefacts quite noticeable, also the increased memory
use for larger renders seems quite moderate to me (unless of course you
change the radiosity settings which is often useful for a larger render)

I recently did a render at 2400x1350 which took 378 Mb instead of ~260 Mb
at 1024x567 (same settings).  

Finally the split render would take longer because radiosity samples are
taken several times, and render time IMO is often more of a problem than
memory use.

Christoph

-- 
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other 
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message