 | | | Story about Rendertime - RE: OGL acceleration question | Story about Rendertime - RE: OGL acceleration question 2004-06-09 - By bj
Back
I think he's right.
They're using minimum passes cause their shots need lot of real DOF effect.
> regarding the 12 pass render..
> a friend of mine who had to learn Renderman where he works, told me that a
> guy from pixar came over
> to teach them renderman, and he claimed that Pixar renders an avrage two
> passes for their movies:
> a forground and a background... thats it!
>
> I dont know if this guys was joking or not, my friend said he was very
> serious...
>
>
>
>
> -- -- Original Message -- --
> From: "Michael Klein" <forum@(protected)>
> To: <XSI@(protected)>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 8:16 PM
> Subject: Story about Rendertime - RE: OGL acceleration question
>
>
> > A magical number in 1989 at a company which used the hardware PIXAR
> > renderman metal cube with 2 proc boards was max. 5 minutes per frame. It
> > wasn't allowed to render in higher times per frame because of the big
> amount
> > of costs they had to control. 4 seconds of a complex animation we would
> > laugh about today cost up to EUR 120.000. There was no raytracing with
> > shadows or refraction possible within the time and budget. Unlocking drop
> > shadows with Alias 2.5 was forbidden to use for production. A stupid
> picture
> > on my AMIGA 1000 rendered 16 hours. Crap. Inefficent.
> >
> > In 1992 I started to work with a Personal Iris. Thanks, Big Bang! Because
> > trained by extreme limitation rules of my AMIGA 1000 I made a big jump
> > forward but found out very fast that even this dream machine had its
> limits
> > ... reached very fast. So a complex scene was something with 150.000
> > pologons and a damn tiny thumbnail flipbook (nice icon on a OS X desktop)
> of
> > something (I thought it was) complex took days to render. I remember my
> > diploma working time. 12 days day and night for a 8 seconds trailer. I
> took
> > the hardware at home to have the chance to finish the trailer in time
> under
> > nerd conditions. So the final rendering was 45 minutes per frame. I had to
> > find other Softimage user which could help me out.
> >
> > The next step was the nice Indigo Extreme. A big step forward but I
> learned
> > the main 3D rule: once you have the faster machine you will play around
> with
> > all those little forbidden road show features (and turn them off later one
> > day before the deadline).
> >
> > A big multiprocessor Onyx with some Indigo's in a network destroyed all my
> > sensibility for AA settings and other stuff in 1995. Especially if you
> > didn't bought the stuff. So it was getting normal to turn on everything
> > before starting the rendering. O.K. ... nice luxury ... but what will
> happen
> > if you are forced to go back from Porsche to Beetle. Freeze!
> >
> > And even how fast your hardware is ... you think: if I only had more CPU
> > power it would take minutes to finish this job ... but that's an illusion.
> >
> > Today our VR ammo which is just a bunch of 9 2,8 GHz CPU's take hours to
> > render a 12 pass 500.000 polygon mobile phone animation. Sometimes I have
> > the feeling: are we doing something wrong here? Is is probably getting to
> > much overdone to split every project into layers instead of just rendering
> a
> > single one? Is this the opposite C64-Syndrome (I mean: the more advanced
> the
> > hardware is, the more inefficient it will be used or programmed ...
> wasting
> > RAM and Power).
> >
> > I'm not sure 100% anymore ... in my point of view the way of different
> > working makes sense and it's some kind of solving the problem professional
> > using special knowledge, skills and a very special tool. But does the
> client
> > really understand why a 12 layer mobile phone will render many hours on a
> > fast little farm to get a multilayer high quality post-controlable result?
> > The most bugging question is: why so complicated ... why not rendering
> just
> > one simple, clean and perfect layer ... (I'm tired about explaining it
> again
> > and again ...). It's not so easy anymore to impose those Stone Age guys
> out
> > of the Valley of the Unknowing.
> >
> > The good thing with faster technology is: we set AA to 1 3 if something is
> > still flickering and we don't care ... but the negative thing is the
> > feeling: wasn't that too easy? Is 10 minutes per frame probably waste of
> CPU
> > time? Why does this little thing fill up my 2GB of RAM?
> >
> > I don't know ... probably routine-blinded by the high speed growth of
> > technology.
> >
> > (just my thoughts during a little break)
> >
> > President
> >
> > -- --Original Message-- --
> >
> > From: owner-xsi@(protected) [mailto:owner-xsi@(protected)
> > <mailto:owner-xsi@(protected)> ] On Behalf Of kim aldis
> > Posted At: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 5:44 PM
> > Posted To: XSI
> > Conversation: OGL acceleration question - RE: +++ Slower Rendering in XSI
> > 4.0 +++
> > Subject: RE: OGL acceleration question - RE: +++ Slower Rendering in XSI
> 4.0
> > +++
> >
> > in the past 25 years, I've seen my frame times go from around 20 minutes
> per
> > frame to, well, around 20 minutes per frame. We just want more.
> >
> > Something Loren Carpenter said a good few years ago was that he felt
> render
> > times were limited rather more by any given person's attention span than
> by
> > the power of the hardware and I think that still stands up. Maybe the time
> > will come but I rather doubt it.
> >
> > Carpenter also has an interesting story about his first presentation of
> the
> > ray tracing work he was doing way back when - he was one of the original
> > developers of ray tracing for image synthesis. He was presenting to
> > management at, I think, IBM, who were wowed. So much so that one of them
> > asked what he'd need to do it in real time - remember, this was some 20
> > years ago. Carpenter thought for a moment, then said, "I'd like a
> helicopter
> > and 768*576 Crays in a field with a red, green and blue lightbulb on the
> top
> > of each one".
> >
> > Respect.
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo@(protected) with the following text in body:
> > unsubscribe xsi
> >
>
> ---
> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo@(protected) with the following text in body:
> unsubscribe xsi
>
---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo@(protected) with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi
|
|
|