"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
> Clipka mentioned in a recent post that bounding in 3.7 has been re-worked;

Never did. So that was either someone else, or a misunderstanding.

Post a reply to this message

clipka wrote:
> Eero Ahonen <aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid> wrote:
>>> "ten times faster" sounds a bit unlikely to me however. How much time are we
>>> talking about?
> What I meant was, are we talking about seconds vs. tens of seconds, or more like
> hours vs. tens of hours?

Well, seconds vs. tens of seconds if I cut everything but the grass out
of the scene and use low resolution, and days vs. tens of days if I
enable trees, radiosity, focal blur, media and bigger resolution.

-- Arttu Voutilainen

Post a reply to this message

clipka wrote:
> "Kenneth" <kdw### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
>> Clipka mentioned in a recent post that bounding in 3.7 has been re-worked;
> 
> Never did. So that was either someone else, or a misunderstanding.

  I remember *someone* *somewhere* mentioning a reworking of the
bounding system for 3.7. It might have been Chris or Thorsten
themselves. It might even be mentioned in the beta release notes somewhere.

Post a reply to this message

"clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> "Kenneth" <kdw### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
> > Clipka mentioned in a recent post that bounding in 3.7 has been re-worked;
>
> Never did. So that was either someone else, or a misunderstanding.

Hm... well, maybe did after all, I guess... in conjunction with area lights.

Post a reply to this message

Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>   I remember *someone* *somewhere* mentioning a reworking of the
> bounding system for 3.7. It might have been Chris or Thorsten
> themselves. It might even be mentioned in the beta release notes somewhere.

I recall something about area lights. Wasn't important enough for me to still
remember what it was exactly... I moved it to the swap file, so to speak.

Post a reply to this message

High!

RobF schrieb:
> Will a New Year bring a New World Order?

So, the conspirationist paranoia finally made it to povray.org... but I 
wonder that, when looking to the world map at the left, Afghanistan is 
not under the influence of this congregation of 
Illuminati/Bilderbergers/Reptiloids/Greys - neither are also most 
Commonwealth countries! Strange, strange...

See you on www.khyberspace.de!

Yadgar

Now playing: Delta One (Synergy) - not $cientologic synarchy, but Larry 
Fast!

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> clipka wrote:
>> "Kenneth" <kdw### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
>>> Clipka mentioned in a recent post that bounding in 3.7 has been
>>> re-worked;
>> 
>> Never did. So that was either someone else, or a misunderstanding.
> 
>   I remember *someone* *somewhere* mentioning a reworking of the
> bounding system for 3.7. It might have been Chris or Thorsten
> themselves. It might even be mentioned in the beta release notes
> somewhere.

There is a whole new bounding algorithm in 3.7. But it's not enabled by
default, you need a command-line switch to select it.

IIRC.

Post a reply to this message

"clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> "clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> > "Kenneth" <kdw### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
> > > Clipka mentioned in a recent post that bounding in 3.7 has been re-worked;
> >
> > Never did. So that was either someone else, or a misunderstanding.
>
> Hm... well, maybe did after all, I guess... in conjunction with area lights.

Yes yes. Having to do with a looks_like object. But since then, I've noticed a
render time difference re: bounding (in 3.6.1), even without that object. Some
of it due to the area_light itself, but some that I can't account for. In any
case, 3.7 seems to have an improved auto-bounding scheme, if I read your notes
correctly. Which is good news!

Ken W.

Post a reply to this message

"clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> "clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> > "Kenneth" <kdw### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
> > > Clipka mentioned in a recent post that bounding in 3.7 has been re-worked;
> >
> > Never did. So that was either someone else, or a misunderstanding.
>
> Hm... well, maybe did after all, I guess... in conjunction with area lights.

Area lights! The Cabal scene had 25 area_lights.

As an experiment, I removed a few elements from the scene to see if I could
isolate the cause of the speedup.

Here are the render times in seconds (does not include parsing time):
(hope this table formats properly)
                                         v3.6    v3.7   speedup
basic scene                               130      36     3.6X
basic scene + radiosity                  1014     127     8.0X
basic scene + area lights                3121     181    17.2X
basic scene + area lights + radiosity    3401     255    13.3X

Radiosity and area lights appear to be much faster on v3.7, faster than just the
multicore speedup. I suspect the algorithm and/or compiler have generated much
more efficient code in v3.7.

Cheers,

Rob.

Post a reply to this message

This scene has something exciting. Probably becaue the atmosphere, the 
setting of that all. That kind of international background. Many powerful 
men from all parts of the world, united in this room. Well, I like the scene 
and the idea!

Tea cups? Hmm. A proposal: use glasses, their transparency might bring some 
additional details into the scene. Also, I think the skin colors are too 
similar, use some slightly or a few stronger different shades. And some 
skins are smoother, some aren't.

Just some ideas. But it is becoming a great work, well done!

Sven



Some hairs of distant persons looks a bit too shiny on light, and some faces 
need some more detasils, wrinkles or skin irregularities, I believe.
"RobF" <nomail@nomail> wrote in message 
news:web.495db135fbe3038a2d55026c0@news.povray.org...
> Will a New Year bring a New World Order?
>
> This render took 6.8GB, mostly from the high resolution textures used on 
> the
> characters. I experimented with both v3.6 and v3.7. The render took about 
> 7h50m
> on v3.6. Surprisingly, the render took about 40 minutes with v3.7! On my 
> Quad
> Core, I was only expecting a 4X increase, but it looks like there are some
> other cool optimizations in v3.7. There are a few radiosity artifacts in 
> the
> 3.7 version of the image, but overall the two images are very similar.
>
> Comments welcome.
>
> Rob.
> ---
> Rob Fitzel
> fitzel.ca/dart
>

Post a reply to this message