SU Podium Forum
Sign up Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
Ericvb

Registered:
Posts: 7
Reply with quote  #1 

Hi,

I'm currently trying to render a drawing that is 250 MB.
During the 'Computing Global PM' process, Podium shuts itself down.

The drawing consists of a couple office buildings, with lots of foilage.

Podium V2.5
Preset: Default (i tried exterior default, and exterior fine as well)
Output: 1920x1080 png
Podium sky 2 background
No options selected

The question is: what can i do to get a render?

I'm hoping you can help me!


PS: i'm unable to attach an image or file since it's work related and still classified.

bigstick

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 10,801
Reply with quote  #2 
It's difficult to comment on this without knowing anything about your scene or the machine you are using.

Use the Analyse tool (spanner/wrench toolbar button) and post a summary of your scene. It could be that your scene has errors that Podium can't deal with. The output from Analyse will identify the most common problems.

It is most likely that you have run out of memory and your machine is just not up to the task.

Also - if you couldn't get the scene to render with the default preset, why on earth would you try the fine AA one, which could take twice as long?

250mb is a big model, but that in itself does not tell the entire story.

If you have 2 models, say of a Greek temple with fully detailed columns, entablature etc, and one is componentised so that everything that is duplicated is an instanced component, and the other is either groups or loose geometry; the second file would be a lot bigger for the same polygon count and render time.

In your case, you may have the worst of both worlds!

You may have a big file and ton of geometry in lots of components! That's going to be tricky.

What often happens is people import geometry from BIM software, and you might end up with your external walls consisting of lots of geometry that is effectively invisible. That's not helpful.

If you are using a lot of foliage - if it's 3d trees, unless they are to be viewed up close, don't. This is why we have a number of different types of tree in the Browser.

Always use 2D trees and plants, unless they are to be seen up close.

You may have added lots of street lights for example, with lots of artificial light sources. Unless you have a very powerful machine, that never ends well...

In addition, you may have some scene weirdness with unsupported textures or material configurations or dodgy 3dWarehouse components.

It's difficult to get people to realise how problematic these can be. 3dW has lots of cool stuff, but it is outweighed by a way higher percentage of crap. Most of it is poorly modelled, much of it is over-detailed and badly-structured and I've lost count of the number of times people have posted problems with scenes not rendering, which have turned out to be caused by stuff from 3DW. Simply adding 'bad' components can cause your render to fail.

This is why we built the Browser!

If, after checking the things above, everything looks reasonable and problem-free (that means check you don't have, say, lots of tables or chairs with very detailed wire structure, and lots of 3d plants on the tables) and that the polygon count is optimised, you might want to check out ProWalker GPU.

It only runs on Windows with specific Nvidia graphics cards, but it can be *very* fast. If you have a compatible machine, it could be your 'get out of jail free' card!










__________________

That which does not kill us makes us stronger
-Friedrich Nietzsche

Ericvb

Registered:
Posts: 7
Reply with quote  #3 

Hi,

Thanks for the detailed response. You are right about a couple things: i do indeed have a lot of 3d foilage, and every model is from 3DW. 

It is correct that about 80% of the foilage is to be seen from up close. Because for this particular project the foilage is a very important aspect for our client.

In the attached image you can see the results.


PS: I'm planning on getting Browser when V2.6 comes out

Attached Images
png drawingresults.png (67.64 KB, 19 views)

bigstick

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 10,801
Reply with quote  #4 
The results have some things you need to fix. I presume you've fixed those and tried to render again?

The issue with foliage is that if you have a lot of it, it can't all be up close!

This is an example of an image I produced with a lot of foliage from the Browser.

View 5.png 

There is a lot of 3d foliage here, but if you consider this render, you could quite easily use 2d vegetation in the background. The hedge is a simple textured 3d volume.

You also haven't told us what spec your machine is. If you are using an i5 with 8Gb of RAM - you are going to struggle. The image above was rendered on my 2008 8 core Mac Pro. I used the Nudge Plugin to randomise the shrubs in size, position and orientation.

Honestly - don't use 3dW unless you can avoid it. You can see you have missing extensions, unsupported textures and incorrect extensions. They are all likely to be caused by 3DW stuff.

You can avoid it by using the Browser. Consider how much it costs - $60. What is your hourly rate? How many hours of your time would you have to save to justify paying for the browser? How long did you spend finding all the crap on 3DW? How long did it take you to set up the materials? You have 101 component instances and none of them are likely to be any good if they are from 3DW. Even the stuff that looks well-modelled usually isn't.

If you are working for even a small company the cost of the Browser is peanuts.

Many people spend more than that on coffee every month. Some people spend a lot more than that going out for an evening.




__________________

That which does not kill us makes us stronger
-Friedrich Nietzsche

Ericvb

Registered:
Posts: 7
Reply with quote  #5 

Hi,

Thanks again. You are right, we should really purchase Browser. 
We only recently started rendering so that's why he haven't got it yet.

Later this week i will do a test-render without any foilage at all. Curious to see what that will do. I'll post the results here.

My specs are as following:

i7 processor
8GB RAM
Nvidia GTX 950
HDD and SSD

Ericvb

Registered:
Posts: 7
Reply with quote  #6 
This is the result.

I deleted 95% of the foilage and the render took about 2 hours (on 'interior bright fine').
Also i have not tried rendering the exterior yet. Which would not work previously. But i will try later this week.

I have some things that need to be changed as seen on the attached file. But other than that, i'm quite pleased.

Please keep in mind that we did not design the interior. This is done by some interior stylist. We only do the exterior.

Let me know what you think about the quality of the render.

Attached Images
jpeg 02 - kopie.jpg (430.97 KB, 13 views)

bigstick

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 10,801
Reply with quote  #7 
First of all, why are you using the fine preset? This is intended for renders which require much higher quality smoothing of jagged edges - or antialiasing.

It is much slower. Only use it if you need it. If absolutely should not be used on test renders.

Choosing the right preset is the singular most important thing for Podium. Have a look here first.

Then look a the preset guide and preset comparison, and then use the default preset.

Have a look at those tables and chairs, and how the metal legs are modelled. If they are modelled with extruded circles with lots of segments (you ought to be using 8 segments smoothed for this sort of thing) then you are simply wasting time unnecessarily. They are also reflective. This means you get a double dose of wasted time. In that scene you won't really be able to see the reflection on the metal frames, and it will increase render time, particularly if they have been modelled as extruded tubes with the default 12 segments.

Same thing goes for the roof trusses. All these things should be components, not groups, and the polygon count should be kept as low as possible. Those trusses ought to be modelled with extruded rectangles, not  circles. 

Where you have the note caused by texture? it looks like a reflection. Don't make your ducts reflective unless they absolutely would be, and most aren't. Some galvanized ducts are slightly glossy, which means you need to use blurred reflection. I wouldn't use it here.

Where you have a note saying not nearly enough light coming from here you could add a large, low power invisible (100%transparent) LEM out of view of the camera. Don't over-illuminate this space, most of the light in that area will be from the sun.

The area with the note way too dark in here needs some recessed light fittings. Don't waste your time, there are lots in the Browser. There might even be some free ones [smile]

Your ground texture is bad. Guess where there are some decent ones...

This is why we built the Browser. You can start with a very simple empty space and very quickly texture and populate it with stuff that is render-ready, and modelled to balance the polygon count against the appearance.

The reason we built the Browser is because of situations like yours! Don't mess around with badly-modelled crap that isn't set up [smile]



__________________

That which does not kill us makes us stronger
-Friedrich Nietzsche

Ericvb

Registered:
Posts: 7
Reply with quote  #8 
Thanks, it worked and i'm really happy with the result. Let's hope the client will be as well [smile]

However, i still have two questions. That you can probably help me with.
(yes, i have searched the forum, but could not really find an answer)

1: If i delete stuff out of view of the render, will that speed the render up?

2: If i want to print my renders on an A3 or A4, what pixel size should i use?
When i search this on the forum everyone starts arguing about 'DPI'... but to be honest, i know nothing about 'DPI's' 'Screen ratios' So maybe you can clear this up for me.

Thanks for all the help so far.

Eric

bigstick

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 10,801
Reply with quote  #9 
1. Geometry processing yes, rendering - no. You need to be a little careful deleting stuff which is out of view, because it gets reflected in surfaces that are in view. Geometry processing can be the fastest part of the process, so it might not save that much time. You might find that your geometry export takes maybe 3 minutes for a 3 hour render. This will depend on your RAM and your CPU.

2. That really depends on the quality you want!

Printers will insist on 300dpi, which is the quality you expect for glossy print brochures. DPI is basically a different way of looking at resolution. The best way to calculate this is with one of the online calculators. This one looks pretty easy.

That is the starting point representing the highest quality on state of the art equipment. In reality, if you are printing the images yourself, it will depend on the quality of your printer and what you print onto. 

I have found that I don't need 300dpi so typically half the resolution (or dpi) shown by these calculators is good enough for our internal printing for things like meetings. 

Unless it's a glossy professional brochure, I would personally work on 150dpi, and see how it looks.



__________________

That which does not kill us makes us stronger
-Friedrich Nietzsche

Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.