Animation previews?

[Nichod]

First they are low poly models. Only 3750 polys per model. But there are 1282 of them. . And what each individual one is doesn't matter. Its still over 4 million polygons. Anyway. I did the tree test. Wireframe is fast in software rendering. And flat is reasonable. Smooth Shaded is slow but expected.

[Nichod]

Originally Posted by medeamajic

I have a zipped Carrara file for you to test out. It is not that complex but it will bog down a P4 at 3.2 GHZ very easy. Keep in mind it would be nice to see all 4 views play at the same time instead of just one.

Tried that scene. Worked fine in software rendering. A bit laggy in full on textured shading. But moderately well in smooth shaded.

[bwtr]

As a follow up on my earlier post.

I grouped my Terrain and the trees and duplicated, putting the dupe behind the first.

A test render of the first(current) frame--at default render settings--was 19secs.

With yours, the similar render was still going at nearly 8MINUTES! Crazy!

My computer crashed at that point--I presume because it did not like your file?

[bwtr]

Mediamajic. More follow up tests on your file.

1.Your file as is--render firsttime frame 9min41secs
2.Delete those two SurfaceReplicator Converted(whatever they are for?)
render time 5min33secs
3.In the Replicator, unclick *align to normal (should have been anyway)
render time 5min11secs
4.In the Render room reset anti aliasing to fast.
render time 1min58secs.
5.Reset Object Accuracy and Shadow Accuracy to default.
Let you try out!

If other settings in the Render Room were set back to default I think you would have little problem. (Did you expect to see some visual gains by fiddling with those render settings? Can't see that you would on your particular exercise anyway.)

As a basic rule I suggest you stick to default settings unless you can prove a worthwhile visual improvement .

[medeamajic]

Here is the deal. I would like to be able to work the way I want to work. I put that scene together in about 3 minutes. I usally have some figures with simple shaders but more complex terrains than in my test file. My point is that Carrara gets slugish. We can argue about it all day but what good would that do any of us? I can only hope you will both accpet the fact that it would not hurt Carrara to have a better preview engine. That is all I am saying in this post.

I am more concerned with animation previews than render times. I need the pixel accuracy at the best and antialiasing at the best setting. They are edited in video software and out put to DVD. With out the best setting for antialiasing and pixel accuracy the fly through will flicker. I also render at 60 FPS and allow Adobe to interlace the frames into fields to get a much better motion on a NTSC monitor.

[medeamajic]

bwtr,

Like I said, I put that scene together in 3 minutes. I was not trying to make anything beautiful. I just wanted to see if your system would get slugish. Your scene is much different than mine. Your scene was not what I wanted to see play quicker. I want you to make my scene play quicker. I rotated the trees and also changes size. I wanted the align to normal selected for this test. I admit it might not look good but I wanted you to leave everything as is but increase the speed. You also did not create real instances. Thanks any how for trying.

Rendering is another issue. I know how to set my render settings to look good on a NTSC monitor.

[bwtr]

You can't have things both ways. Preview render times relate to the rendering settings. The simple cure. You don't set your fancy render settings until the stage where you want to actually do a full render.

Thats what most of us do normally.

[Nichod]

Originally Posted by medeamajic

bwtr,

Like I said, I put that scene together in 3 minutes. I was not trying to make anything beautiful. I just wanted to see if your system would get slugish. Your scene is much different than mine. Your scene was not what I wanted to see play quicker. I want you to make my scene play quicker. I rotated the trees and also changes size. I wanted the align to normal selected for this test. I admit it might not look good but I wanted you to leave everything as is but increase the speed. You also did not create real instances. Thanks any how for trying.

Rendering is another issue. I know how to set my render settings to look good on a NTSC monitor.

Nothing wrong with wanting more speed. But stating that Carrara is slow and can't handle large scenes is wrong. On my crappy laptop I can handle over 4 million polygons and in flat shaded mode have useable realtime performance.

And why are you replicating the trees and creating real instances? Just view the mesh in properties settings and that will give you additional performance benefits.

And in every production scenario that I know of we wouldn't rely on realtime motion tests. Because realtime performance is never accurate to the camera or scene's true motion. We'd do a quick preview render in OpenGL or Low Realistic render settings. We'd NEVER setup a final render as it is without many tests.

From the specs of your computer compared to mine, you should be flying through scenes with much more ease than mine. Anyway. I'd suggest not even using the 3D preview for final motion tests. It will never be accurate to the real motion. For a basic gist..ok. But do a render test. Also, don't rely on OpenGL unless you have a powerful video card it just won't run large scene's smoothly, and if you do turn of antialiasing, really no point in making the view pretty if all you want is a simple motion test. Use software rendering, they did a good job of optimizing it.

[bwtr]

Mediamajic
You 12sec movie, rendering at 60 frames a second would take over 136hrs.

To me, a crazy way to work--I would never get anything done.

Would appreciate seeing some of your work to show us the visual benefits your work methods justify.

[medeamajic]

I am sorry I made my post. I am not asking you guys how to set up my scenes or how to render them to look good on an NTSC TV. I know how to do test renders but I would like the preview to look as close to the real thing as possible. That is why True Space tries to do photo realistic preveiws. I would like more detailed previews and more speed. That is all I am asking for. I do not want to argue with either of you anymore about it. I did not say Carrara is slow. I said it gets slugish for certain scenes. It would be great to one day see dynamic hair in preview mode.



bwtr,

How much video editing have you done? I do not like to render 60 FPS with high pixel accuracy but that is the way it must be done to look good for flythoughs. Most scenes do not need to be rendered this way but because of the camera movement it has to be set up this way for the fly throughs and orbital pans with buildings in the scene. Other wise the buildings will jitter.

[bwtr]

I have two sons and a daughter who do that kind of work on a daily basis for a living. They say they would be unemployed using working methods that you suggest ! Carrara is used as the normal animation app.

As I asked, would love to see some of your work.

[bwtr]

Horses for courses!

OH my gosh! It's nearly 20 years since I retired! I was a b@w and colour photojournalist--in the TRUE meaning of that profession.

I was luckyto have a lot of works published nationally (Australia) and internationally in a whole swag of languge editions.

I tried for years to develop a movie capability---I have miles of Super 8 movies--which I have since had converted to VCR for my grand children to look at to see thier parents at play--growing up.

THEY ARE GHASTLY!

I have experimented with the Carrara motion stuff--and still years from completing my "MrNose" cartoon idea. But the thing that stands out is that I am NOTa moving image maker--and never will be!

With my images wanted the day before I took them by my customers, !!!
3D rendering delays are right off my agenda thinking. I need results NOW!

[medeamajic]

bwtr,

I guess it is time for me to brag about my self. I worked on a $80,000.00 Avid Media Composer for the City of Detroit. We also have a full studio and suitaces studio. We had well over a million dollars worth of equipment. I do not need to take advise from you or your kids. Just read the posts. Bryce, Carrara and even Lightwave will all get jitters when making fast pans on a NTSC monitor if not done properly. You need the 60 FPS and then you need to interlace the frames into fields. Not all scenes need this teatment. Only scenes with fast or semi fast panning. I have seen several people do 3-D animation. I have scene very jerky movement when the camera pans. It does not happen with zooms as much. The same thing can happen with video if the odd and even fields are inverted. If you have not out put any scenes with an orbital pan to an NTSC monitor why would you give me advise on it? I can render at 30 FPS and set the antialiasing to poor and the pixel accuarcy to 4.0 but it will not look as good as the method I use. Of course your still images will not jitter no matter how you render the scene.

If you are not a moving image maker then why are you giving me advise?

I have heard others say it is best render out MJPEG TARGA images and then use an anti flicker filter. I will try this method soon. It might work and allow me to render at 30 FPS. You do know that some still 2-D graphic art does jitter when imported into video editing system don't you?


Where exactly do your kids work? I bet they have out put pans in Carrara to the NTSC monitor. I bet I could ask why the objects are so jerky. I bet they would say "that is how 3-D animation looks when played on a TV". It does look jerky when not done right. It is one thing to render for CD-ROM or the web it is another thing render for broadcast. Playing video with fields in Windows Media Player will look like crap because Windows Media Player can not play the interlaced fields. On the other hand an animation that looks good in Windows Media Player might look like crap on an NTSC monitor.


bwtr,

Why do you think they have the option to render at 50 FPS (PAL) and 60 FPS (NTSC)? Carrara does let you select a field dominance at render but it does not look that great. I wish it did.

I would love you to send me a DVD with a camera pan using your method.

[medeamajic]

http://www.maxon.net/pages/products/...dopengl_e.html

All I want is for Carrara to improve the animation previews so there is less of a need for test renders. Maxon and True Space are trying to improve there previews and I think Carrara 6 should have better previews also.

[bwtr]

When did fast panning come into the discussion! I won't go into my childrens national awards for thier stuff because the thread is obsolete!

[bwtr]

CINEMA 4D now supports enhanced OpenGL options,>>>>>> available with new powerful graphics cards.

[bwtr]

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showpost...91&postcount=1

Every Carrara owner will require one of these--and a bank overdraft!

[medeamajic]

Originally Posted by bwtr

When did fast panning come into the discussion! I won't go into my childrens national awards for thier stuff because the thread is obsolete!

I think you can blame yourself for that. All I wanted you to do was play my Carrara scene. You let your ego get the best of you and decided to edit my Carrara scene and give me advise. I was not asking for your advise on this thread. You even made a post about your groovey kids being fired if they use my methods. You say you don't do animation but you were persistant in arguring with me so I explained the method to my madness. I imagine you thought I was a 16 year old shmuck until I braged about my self.

I would just like Carrara to have better previews. You did not need to waste your time or my time editing my Carrara file and then giving me advise. With out your advise this thread would not have gotten of track.

[bwtr]

I'me 75. my kids in the 50s, grandchildren in the 20s. If you read what was written I hope(d) you would percieve I was on a consructive helpfull companion learning curve. I thought I disparaged myself!

Having said that, I am not the only one on this thread, and many others over the past, who have regularly discouraged over expectation of methods which are of slight advantage and seriously time consuming.

Practicalities should always override theories which are of minor practical value.

There are some on these threads that take pride in that a 10 by 8 image take 5 days to render!. I scream if it takes half an hour!

[bwtr]

ps I have just reread my thread 20. I am amazed at your interpretation!

Heavens above.