Chris Maryan wrote:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0009 the photon patch, people were always complaining that
they
> couldn't do disco balls. Now we have the means but I have yet to see one
> in p.b.i, what gives?

You know what? I poitned the same erlier in p.b.i. :-)
I'm still waiting(working on my new linux system. *yumma*, as well as playing
with scnes lit only with reflective caustics...)

-- 
//Spider
        [ spi### [at] bahnhofse ]-[ http://www.bahnhof.se/~spider/ ]
What I can do and what I could do, I just don't know anymore
                "Marian"
        By: "Sisters Of Mercy"

Post a reply to this message

Rick wrote:
> >photon patch because of a lack of processing power,
> 
> neither do any of us!! (well not as miuch as we would like)
> 
> try leaving it to render overnight, works for me :)
> 
> Rick

Remember those original overdrive chips that turned a 486-66 to a
pentium-83. I have one of those and 32MB RAM. Overnight for you means
three days for me. Maybe I'll take a shot at doing something simple like
a mirrored ball on a checkered plane :-)

-- 
Chris Maryan
mailto:cma### [at] geocitiescom
***
Will work for cash.
***
Email me if you are interested in donating
to the Chris Maryan needs money fund.
We will also accept donations to the Chris
needs a Pentium II or SGI workstation 
fund and the Chris needs a car fund.

Post a reply to this message

Chris Maryan wrote:
> 
> Remember those original overdrive chips that turned a 486-66 to a
> pentium-83. I have one of those and 32MB RAM. Overnight for you means
> three days for me. Maybe I'll take a shot at doing something simple like
> a mirrored ball on a checkered plane :-)
> 

Don't be too discouraged by some people's high render times with photons...
usually, adding photons doesn't do any worse than double the render time (which
isn't that good... but it is usually not even that bad).  If you set the proper
settings (using ignore_photons for glass/mirror objects and for objects that
for sure won't get hit by photons), render times can actually be pretty good.

A big tip (I'll make a FAQ/Tips page eventually) is to make sure that all of
the FINAL densities of photons are of the same general magnitude.  You dont
want spots with really high density photons and another area with really low
density photons.  You'll always have some variation (which is a good thing),
but having really big differences in photon density is what causes some scenes
to take many hours to render.

For example, Spider recently posted a nice image lit completely by photons
which took 14+ hours to render.  However, with a few modifications to the
densities and radii, I was able to cut that down to just a few hours (I only
rendered at 640x480, but it took less than 1.5 hours for me on a similar
computer).

So... I suggest you try out some scenes... just keep the photon count low.  A
few weeks ago I also only had 32 megs (recently upgraded to 96), and I was
rendering test scenes with around 500,000 photons with no problems.

-Nathan

Post a reply to this message

Most of the simple scenes I've done have only taken a minute or two to
render, and maybe 10 to 20 minutes for a 640x480 renderer using AA.  The
animation I posted of the fish only took about 3 minutes per frame.

I kind of let the render time influence what I put in the scene.  I
might turn off either refraction or reflection to speed things up, or
break up unions so I get a more precise distribution of photons.  Under
good conditions the photon mapping is quite fast.  

-Mike

Nathan Kopp wrote:
> 
> Chris Maryan wrote:
> >
> > Remember those original overdrive chips that turned a 486-66 to a
> > pentium-83. I have one of those and 32MB RAM. Overnight for you means
> > three days for me. Maybe I'll take a shot at doing something simple like
> > a mirrored ball on a checkered plane :-)
> >
> 
> Don't be too discouraged by some people's high render times with photons...
> usually, adding photons doesn't do any worse than double the render time (which
> isn't that good... but it is usually not even that bad).  If you set the proper
> settings (using ignore_photons for glass/mirror objects and for objects that
> for sure won't get hit by photons), render times can actually be pretty good.
> 
> A big tip (I'll make a FAQ/Tips page eventually) is to make sure that all of
> the FINAL densities of photons are of the same general magnitude.  You dont
> want spots with really high density photons and another area with really low
> density photons.  You'll always have some variation (which is a good thing),
> but having really big differences in photon density is what causes some scenes
> to take many hours to render.
> 
> For example, Spider recently posted a nice image lit completely by photons
> which took 14+ hours to render.  However, with a few modifications to the
> densities and radii, I was able to cut that down to just a few hours (I only
> rendered at 640x480, but it took less than 1.5 hours for me on a similar
> computer).
> 
> So... I suggest you try out some scenes... just keep the photon count low.  A
> few weeks ago I also only had 32 megs (recently upgraded to 96), and I was
> rendering test scenes with around 500,000 photons with no problems.
> 
> -Nathan

Post a reply to this message

Nathan Kopp wrote:
> For example, Spider recently posted a nice image lit completely by photons
> which took 14+ hours to render.  However, with a few modifications to the
> densities and radii, I was able to cut that down to just a few hours (I only
> rendered at 640x480, but it took less than 1.5 hours for me on a similar
> computer).
> 
/me b tooopid


-- 
//Spider
        [ spi### [at] bahnhofse ]-[ http://www.bahnhof.se/~spider/ ]
What I can do and what I could do, I just don't know anymore
                "Marian"
        By: "Sisters Of Mercy"

Post a reply to this message

Spider wrote:
> 
> Nathan Kopp wrote:
> > For example, Spider recently posted a nice image lit completely by photons
> > which took 14+ hours to render.  However, with a few modifications to the
> > densities and radii, I was able to cut that down to just a few hours (I only
> > rendered at 640x480, but it took less than 1.5 hours for me on a similar
> > computer).
> >
> /me b tooopid

It just takes time to learn good settings (and I've got a bit of an advantage
by knowing exactly how the code works).  ;-)

-Nathan

Post a reply to this message

Thats exactly what i used to have when i started POV!!!

try using the dos version, it will go a lot faster on your machine than the
win one will..

also try using POV2 and the dos version of Moray, to get most of your scence
done, then do a final redner / tweaking session with the latest version..

Rick
Chris Maryan wrote in message <36F### [at] geocitiescom>...
>Rick wrote:
>> >photon patch because of a lack of processing power,
>>
>> neither do any of us!! (well not as miuch as we would like)
>>
>> try leaving it to render overnight, works for me :)
>>
>> Rick
>
>Remember those original overdrive chips that turned a 486-66 to a
>pentium-83. I have one of those and 32MB RAM. Overnight for you means
>three days for me. Maybe I'll take a shot at doing something simple like
>a mirrored ball on a checkered plane :-)
>
>--
>Chris Maryan
>mailto:cma### [at] geocitiescom
>***
>Will work for cash.
>***
>Email me if you are interested in donating
>to the Chris Maryan needs money fund.
>We will also accept donations to the Chris
>needs a Pentium II or SGI workstation
>fund and the Chris needs a car fund.

Post a reply to this message

Actually, working with the latest version of Moray and POV isn't that
bad. The quick render (POLYRAY?) plugin for Moray really helps.

So I downloaded the UV patch and the render times aren't that bad. I
have to keep the resolution low and AA and complex scenes are almost
impossible but I managed to keep myself entertained by playing around
with 'transparent ball over a checkered plane'. Very cool stuff. Photons
rock, thanks Nathan.

Rick wrote:
> 
> Thats exactly what i used to have when i started POV!!!
> 
> try using the dos version, it will go a lot faster on your machine than the
> win one will..
> 
> also try using POV2 and the dos version of Moray, to get most of your scence
> done, then do a final redner / tweaking session with the latest version..

-- 
Chris Maryan
mailto:cma### [at] geocitiescom
***
Will work for cash.
***
Email me if you are interested in donating
to the Chris Maryan needs money fund.
We will also accept donations to the Chris
needs a Pentium II or SGI workstation 
fund and the Chris needs a car fund.

Post a reply to this message

Chris Maryan wrote:
> 
> Remember those original overdrive chips that turned a 486-66 to a
> pentium-83. I have one of those and 32MB RAM. Overnight for you means
> three days for me. Maybe I'll take a shot at doing something simple like
> a mirrored ball on a checkered plane :-)

Maybe you should spare some of your ray-tracing time and
try and make some money (you know, get some work and so in
the real world). A decently fast computer isn't _that_
expensive anymore.

Markus

oh, and don't forget: ;-)
-- 

 Ich nicht eine Sekunde!!!" H. Heinol in Val Thorens

Post a reply to this message

Markus Becker wrote:
> 
> Chris Maryan wrote:
> >
> > Remember those original overdrive chips that turned a 486-66 to a
> > pentium-83. I have one of those and 32MB RAM. Overnight for you means
> > three days for me. Maybe I'll take a shot at doing something simple like
> > a mirrored ball on a checkered plane :-)
> 
> Maybe you should spare some of your ray-tracing time and
> try and make some money (you know, get some work and so in
> the real world). A decently fast computer isn't _that_
> expensive anymore.

Actually I'm working towards that (yes I do have a job in the real
world). However, since I'm going to university in September, I don't
intend to get a computer until August just so I can get those few more
precious months before the new computer becomes obsolete:-)

-- 
Chris Maryan
mailto:cma### [at] geocitiescom
***
Will work for cash.
***
Email me if you are interested in donating
to the Chris Maryan needs money fund.
We will also accept donations to the Chris
needs a Pentium II or SGI workstation 
fund and the Chris needs a car fund.

Post a reply to this message