 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I've tested two original Scenes in diffrent ways. Here is the original
Log-file:
patio-radio rendered in 1024x768 in 1 Tiles (-) from 08-11-2002 / 07:03:09
to 08-11-2002 / 07:21:14 (1084).
cornell rendered in 1024x768 in 1 Tiles (-) from 08-11-2002 / 07:21:16 to
08-11-2002 / 07:29:47 (511).
patio-radio rendered in 1024x768 in 2 Tiles (V) from 08-11-2002 / 08:01:28
to 08-11-2002 / 08:15:17 (829).
cornell rendered in 1024x768 in 2 Tiles (V) from 08-11-2002 / 08:15:18 to
08-11-2002 / 08:20:01 (284).
cornell rendered in 1024x768 in 8 Tiles (H) from 08-11-2002 / 08:49:56 to
08-11-2002 / 08:53:47 (230).
patio-radio rendered in 1024x768 in 8 Tiles (H) from 08-11-2002 / 08:49:53
to 08-11-2002 / 09:00:06 (614).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Theo Gottwald * wrote:
>
> I've tested two original Scenes in diffrent ways. Here is the original
> Log-file:
>
> patio-radio rendered in 1024x768 in 1 Tiles (-) from 08-11-2002 / 07:03:09
> to 08-11-2002 / 07:21:14 (1084).
>
> cornell rendered in 1024x768 in 1 Tiles (-) from 08-11-2002 / 07:21:16 to
> 08-11-2002 / 07:29:47 (511).
>
> patio-radio rendered in 1024x768 in 2 Tiles (V) from 08-11-2002 / 08:01:28
> to 08-11-2002 / 08:15:17 (829).
>
> cornell rendered in 1024x768 in 2 Tiles (V) from 08-11-2002 / 08:15:18 to
> 08-11-2002 / 08:20:01 (284).
>
> cornell rendered in 1024x768 in 8 Tiles (H) from 08-11-2002 / 08:49:56 to
> 08-11-2002 / 08:53:47 (230).
>
> patio-radio rendered in 1024x768 in 8 Tiles (H) from 08-11-2002 / 08:49:53
> to 08-11-2002 / 09:00:06 (614).
The question with radiosity and photons is not whether your method is
faster but whether the image *quality* is the same. If you carefully
compare the images you are quite likely to find there are distinct
differences between what a single engine render produces and what
your tiles method produces. There is no doubt that for most of
POV-Ray's features your program has substantial possibilities for
speed improvements but for a small subset of POV-Ray's features your
program cannot resolve the problems inherent with those features in
muti tile renderings. It is true they will still render faster but
if you did an analytical comparison of the two methods you will find
that the images your program produces are not identical to the images
a single instance of POV-Ray will produce.
--
Ken Tyler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi Rick,
(VNC)
1. IF I do so, how can I play next month Unreal Tournament 2 with my friends
:-) ?
(I REALLY HOPE the man from Intel has been there and coded it for
SMP/Hyperthreading) :-)
2. The system works so I can proof that it works .... you can download a
BETA that will change in a few days here:
http://www.it-berater.org/smpov.htm .
3. If you have questions or suggestions mail me.
--Theo Gottwald
PS: I've never understood why so simple things are not already built in the
POVRAY Shell.
The person who did this Shell was really a perfect programmer, he did
not forget ANYTHING ...
just that ....
"Rick [Kitty5]" <ric### [at] kitty5 com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3d558e7a@news.povray.org...
> Theo Gottwald * wrote:
>
> Looks like an intersting stop gap till povray gets its head round
> distributed rendering, and I ca see situations where it will be excedingly
> useful
>
> > but www.theogott.de where you can see my three PC's.
>
> hmmm, perhaps you should concider vmware. hooking those 3 vids to the same
> boxen and reclaiming some of your deskspace (keeping the other machines
> running and using vnc)
>
> --
> Rick
>
> Kitty5 NewMedia http://Kitty5.co.uk
> POV-Ray News & Resources http://Povray.co.uk
> TEL : +44 (01270) 501101 - FAX : +44 (01270) 251105 - ICQ : 15776037
>
> PGP Public Key
> http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Aug 2002 15:16:11 +0200, Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
wrote:
> Yes, so it's an automatism for distributing partial renders.
BTW: I have readed some old pov related pages from my own archives and found
link to www.distributed.net. Let's dream about distributed rendering :-)
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I've thought about that.
I've thought if it makes sense to do communication via TCP/IP and then be
able to distribute a rendering even over the internet.
However that is far from my current implementation cause in the first step I
want to distribute localy only - its safer).
For future successors we can dream from a POV 5 that can get rendertime from
another user anywhere in the world ... (Its not filesharing ... its
ray-sharing :-) ....
--theo
"ABX" <abx### [at] babilonorg> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:94meluc0b46jhi2gibb8ssigi4nb8hju0r@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 10 Aug 2002 15:16:11 +0200, Christoph Hormann
<chr### [at] gmxde>
> wrote:
> > Yes, so it's an automatism for distributing partial renders.
>
> BTW: I have readed some old pov related pages from my own archives and
found
> link to www.distributed.net. Let's dream about distributed rendering :-)
>
> ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Theo Gottwald * wrote:
> For future successors we can dream from a POV 5 that can get
> rendertime from another user anywhere in the world ... (Its not
> filesharing ... its ray-sharing :-) ....
Stuff waiting for 5, a 4 rewrite is due - how about writing it from scratch
as a p2p ray server?
--
Rick
Kitty5 NewMedia http://Kitty5.co.uk
POV-Ray News & Resources http://Povray.co.uk
TEL : +44 (01270) 501101 - FAX : +44 (01270) 251105 - ICQ : 15776037
PGP Public Key
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.381 / Virus Database: 214 - Release Date: 02/08/2002
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I doubt most people want to sent their scene-files through the net for
getting them rendered piece by piece.
However, I believe that next generation computers can render nearly anything
as fast as necessary.
However, rendertime-sharing could be an option for an future release.
"Rick [Kitty5]" <ric### [at] kitty5com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3d57ab88$1@news.povray.org...
> Theo Gottwald * wrote:
> > For future successors we can dream from a POV 5 that can get
> > rendertime from another user anywhere in the world ... (Its not
> > filesharing ... its ray-sharing :-) ....
>
> Stuff waiting for 5, a 4 rewrite is due - how about writing it from
scratch
> as a p2p ray server?
>
>
> --
> Rick
>
> Kitty5 NewMedia http://Kitty5.co.uk
> POV-Ray News & Resources http://Povray.co.uk
> TEL : +44 (01270) 501101 - FAX : +44 (01270) 251105 - ICQ : 15776037
>
> PGP Public Key
> http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA
>
>
>
> ---
>
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.381 / Virus Database: 214 - Release Date: 02/08/2002
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Theo Gottwald * wrote:
>
> [...]
> However, I believe that next generation computers can render nearly anything
> as fast as necessary.
... and 640k of memory is more than anyone will ever need.
scnr
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 03 Aug. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I guess Bill G. agreed with you some time ago ... :-)
"Christoph Hormann" <chr### [at] gmxde> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3D57BC11.1DA5AC40@gmx.de...
>
>
> Theo Gottwald * wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> > However, I believe that next generation computers can render nearly
anything
> > as fast as necessary.
>
> ... and 640k of memory is more than anyone will ever need.
>
> scnr
>
> Christoph
>
> --
> POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
> TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
> Last updated 03 Aug. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 12 Aug 2002 15:37:44 +0200, "Theo Gottwald *"
<The### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
>However, I believe that next generation computers can render nearly anything
>as fast as necessary.
Hah! I've been messing around with POV-Ray for 10+ years and the only
thing added cpu power does is to make things that was too heavy
bearable. You still end up with more or less the same render-times,
you can just do more computationally intensive scenes. Once 320x200
was high-res, AA was only for the final trace and stuff like media and
radiosity was a pipe dream. Now I have at least 200 times as much cpu
power and it's still relatively easy to design scenes that takes days
to render, same as the old days. The scenes just look a bit nicer :-)
/Erkki
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
