 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Norbert Kern" <nor### [at] t-online de> wrote:
> I redid my 18 years old image, since it hasn't aged well.
>
> Back then it was impossible to optimize textures, lighting and so on. Render
> speed was 1.2 pps and memory need was at the limit.
>
> So I recently changed most plants, lighting, added a media effect and the water
> flows now in different directions...
>
> Media is faked, because I rendered an image from light position, made an
> height_field, filled it with emitting media and added it via a separate render.
How long does it take to render today?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Thorsten Froehlich" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> How long does it take to render today?
A nearly identical 3.5 version of the old image takes 349 s trace time with the
same settings (800*600 AA0.1 /3.0 GHz/16 threads/64 GB system). In 2001 a brand
new 1.4 GHz Athlon C / 1 GB system needed 101 h 18 m trace time.
So my current and slightly outdated system is 1045 times faster - astonishing...
Regards
Norbert
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 12/25/19 6:14 AM, also sprach Norbert Kern:
Ouch. I think a mosquito just bit me.
--
dik
Rendered 49,882,521,600 of 49,882,521,600 pixels (100%)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Op 25/12/2019 om 15:57 schreef Norbert Kern:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>
>>> Media is faked, because I rendered an image from light position, made an
>>> height_field, filled it with emitting media and added it via a separate render.
>
>> *That* is a beautiful piece of work indeed! Interesting to compare with
>> the original. Very, very well done. You are the unsurpassed master of
>> these kind of scenes. I am not sure I understand entirely how you
>> achieved your media here, though.
>>
>> --
>> Thomas
>
>
> Thank you very much!
>
> I simply made an black-white image of the trees alone and used it as an
> height_field filled with emitting media after orienting it towards the
> light_source.
> Despite using emitting media only it is slow when incorporated in the original
> scene, so it had to be rendered separatedly and combined in an extra scene.
>
>
> Norbert
>
>
Smart! I shall have to try this (one day...).
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Very well done. I like it !
Especially the trick about the "fake" media. Really clever...
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> Op 25/12/2019 om 15:57 schreef Norbert Kern:
> > Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> >
> >>> Media is faked, because I rendered an image from light position, made an
> >>> height_field, filled it with emitting media and added it via a separate render.
> >
> >> *That* is a beautiful piece of work indeed! Interesting to compare with
> >> the original. Very, very well done. You are the unsurpassed master of
> >> these kind of scenes. I am not sure I understand entirely how you
> >> achieved your media here, though.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Thomas
> >
> >
> > Thank you very much!
> >
> > I simply made an black-white image of the trees alone and used it as an
> > height_field filled with emitting media after orienting it towards the
> > light_source.
> > Despite using emitting media only it is slow when incorporated in the original
> > scene, so it had to be rendered separatedly and combined in an extra scene.
> >
> >
> > Norbert
> >
> >
>
> Smart! I shall have to try this (one day...).
>
> --
> Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Norbert Kern" <nor### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
> I redid my 18 years old image, since it hasn't aged well.
>
> Back then it was impossible to optimize textures, lighting and so on. Render
> speed was 1.2 pps and memory need was at the limit.
>
> So I recently changed most plants, lighting, added a media effect and the water
> flows now in different directions...
>
> Media is faked, because I rendered an image from light position, made an
> height_field, filled it with emitting media and added it via a separate render.
>
>
> Merry x-mas to all
> Norbert Kern
That's a really nice image. A paradise for butterflies indeed. It reminds me of
the 'marais ( =swamp ) Poitevin' in west of France.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warren" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> That's a really nice image. A paradise for butterflies indeed. It reminds me of
> the 'marais ( =swamp ) Poitevin' in west of France.
Thank you for pointing to marais poitevin.
Norbert
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi(gh)!
On 25.12.19 12:14, Norbert Kern wrote:
> I redid my 18 years old image, since it hasn't aged well.
>
> Back then it was impossible to optimize textures, lighting and so on. Render
> speed was 1.2 pps and memory need was at the limit.
>
> So I recently changed most plants, lighting, added a media effect and the water
> flows now in different directions...
>
> Media is faked, because I rendered an image from light position, made an
> height_field, filled it with emitting media and added it via a separate render.
Stunning! I would like to (like I already did in back 2001, when I saw
the last version) see an olive-skinned mustached "swamp gypsy" with
waist-long black hair wading through the water...
See you in Khyberspace!
Yadgar
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi(gh)!
On 26.12.19 08:57, Norbert Kern wrote:
> A nearly identical 3.5 version of the old image takes 349 s trace time with the
> same settings (800*600 AA0.1 /3.0 GHz/16 threads/64 GB system). In 2001 a brand
> new 1.4 GHz Athlon C / 1 GB system needed 101 h 18 m trace time.
>
> So my current and slightly outdated system is 1045 times faster - astonishing...
Too bad that I lost my first Moray-powered POV-Ray 2.2 scenes long
ago... would be very intriguing to compare rendering times on my current
AMD FX-6200 six-core machine with those on the Cyrix 80486 40DX back in
1996!
But... 64 GB? Wow... and I thought, at 24 GB, I was "over-motorized"! If
I only could afford my own scaled-down liquid salt moderated thorium
fission reactor on the balcony, I also would go for a such powerful machine!
See you in Khyberspace!
Yadgar
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Norbert Kern wrote on 25/12/2019 12:14:
> I redid my 18 years old image, since it hasn't aged well.
>
> Back then it was impossible to optimize textures, lighting and so on. Render
> speed was 1.2 pps and memory need was at the limit.
>
> So I recently changed most plants, lighting, added a media effect and the water
> flows now in different directions...
>
> Media is faked, because I rendered an image from light position, made an
> height_field, filled it with emitting media and added it via a separate render.
>
>
> Merry x-mas to all
> Norbert Kern
>
An incredible image.
A very credible image.
Paolo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
