SU Podium Forum
Register  |   |   |  Calendar  |  Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 2 of 3      Prev   1   2   3   Next
paulwacko

Registered:
Posts: 117
Reply with quote  #16 
I just did a test on a 22Mb file up to the stage OOPR starts its render.

i7 4Gb RAM, Win7

Using Render 2'30" + 6' to render
Using Generate 1' + 1'30" to read + 6' to render

OOPR seems to be sucking the life out of the computer while its waiting for the render to be generated.  I did need to try the render command a couple of times before it behaved itself.



Paul Jackson

bigstick

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 10,071
Reply with quote  #17 
Paul, this is a problem but I'm not sure how widespread it is.

If you use the normal 'Render' option, the data gets held in RAM and is streamed straight to OOPR.

If you use the 'Generate' option, the data is written to disk, and then loaded into OOPR. As we all know disk activities are massively slower than processing data held in RAM.

It looks like something has eaten all your RAM. What else do you have running?
Does it make any difference if you have caching turned on (or off)?

Apart from Paul and Mitch, anyone else noticed this kind of issue?

__________________

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

paulwacko

Registered:
Posts: 117
Reply with quote  #18 
I thought there would be a big difference but the totals of both methods are the same.
But definitely seems slower than previously.
I have tried it with only Sketchup running and is the same and subsequent renders get slower.
However, I wouldn't trust my computer 100% as i have been pushing it to the limit.

Paul

bigstick

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 10,071
Reply with quote  #19 
Paul, we need this to be quantified. For example times for each render, and for successive ones.
__________________

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

cadmunkey

Registered:
Posts: 56
Reply with quote  #20 
Well I noticed a large generation time but I can only compare it to v1.7 as I only upgraded to v2 yesterday and my test model is huge (70MB model). Its a bit cheeky when it says render time 0hrs 54mins when it took an hour to generate though. Using caching doesnt seem to solve things but I'm always tweaking my model so cant complain about that.
Win 7 64bit, 12GB RAM and i7-920 cpu.
Very impressed with the results though!

bigstick

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 10,071
Reply with quote  #21 
Caching is for subsequent renders. The data is cached in RAM so that it isn't exported unless certain types of changes are made to the scene. Everything that changes geometry, including modifying materials triggers a reconversion of the geometry.
__________________

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

natmonday

Registered:
Posts: 4
Reply with quote  #22 

I recently downloaded the new version 2.8 and have had lots of trouble with bugsplats.  This never occured until I upgraded and now i cannot even import a new texture or place a component from with browser without getting a bugsplat... anyone have any ideas to fix this?

bigstick

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 10,071
Reply with quote  #23 
I've responded to your PM. The cause doesn't sound Podium related. Need much more info to try to fix it though!
__________________

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

SGRN

Registered:
Posts: 26
Reply with quote  #24 
As far as I can see geometry caching does not work for me, at least I getthe impression its not "skipping" the "processing geometry" part for any subsequent render anyway. I have a huge model, rendering takes about an hour on my win 7 64 bit 8gb i7 2.8 gh pc. Processing scenes almost the same time or even more, about an hour.
subsequent renderings without any changes except "style" still take same hour to proces (also if I dont make any changes, just render again)..Whats going on? I expected a huge difference with geometry caching in Podium 2.8, exteriordefault preset.

__________________
Any fool can make something complicated. It takes an effort to make simplicity

StudioSGRN | http://www.sgrn.nl
Nick00

Avatar / Picture

Maître érudit
Registered:
Posts: 3,260
Reply with quote  #25 
Geometry catching skips the "Processing Geometry" phase, which is often very long. Its pretty easy to notice if it works or not.

This phase, done in sketcUp, will not be calculated in the render time the OOPR gives.

However, it will automatically be turn off if you have face-me components in you scene (2d trees, default guy at start up).


__________________
Podium Tech. Support
SGRN

Registered:
Posts: 26
Reply with quote  #26 
That explains a lot, my model is filled with face-me components. I actually use those in most of my architectural models, thats a pitty..
__________________
Any fool can make something complicated. It takes an effort to make simplicity

StudioSGRN | http://www.sgrn.nl
Nick00

Avatar / Picture

Maître érudit
Registered:
Posts: 3,260
Reply with quote  #27 
Well if it would not be disabled, they would keep the same orientation in subsequent renders even if the camera changes position.
__________________
Podium Tech. Support
SGRN

Registered:
Posts: 26
Reply with quote  #28 
So geometry caching gets disabled if the model contains face-me components?
Because when I don't change anything, not even view or shadows, processing isn't "skipped". ( I just had to redo a rendering because I forgot to adjust exposure and intensity)

__________________
Any fool can make something complicated. It takes an effort to make simplicity

StudioSGRN | http://www.sgrn.nl
Nick00

Avatar / Picture

Maître érudit
Registered:
Posts: 3,260
Reply with quote  #29 
Yes.
__________________
Podium Tech. Support
SGRN

Registered:
Posts: 26
Reply with quote  #30 
V2.8 doesn't seem to work on a machine running winxp sp3 2 gb, core2duo 3ghz. Running SU8. It says "starting render server" , and doesn't get past that stage. Even in the simplest 3d model ( a box). any suggestions? (yes i did install the 32bit version)
__________________
Any fool can make something complicated. It takes an effort to make simplicity

StudioSGRN | http://www.sgrn.nl
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation: