huge render issue

[jddog]

Hi sketch...

probably try to do smaller prepass before to launch the final render, this can help probably... do some smaller reder before and then lauch it in the final resolution.

I have an experience with large file and like I can understand you image will be probably require mora that 80/90 hrs of rendering... take it slow...

Can a lool like this help you ?
http://www.extensis.com/en/products/product_family.jsp?locale=en_US&id=prod120009

Are you sure that 400 di res is really required ?

And fatal question.. why radiosity... di you use hdri images can you fake the radisoty with a dome and play with lights, like Carles Piles (good tutorial in his web site...)

Well I didn't bring you solution I think, but hope that some input can help you

jdd

[AdamT]

If you have NET and additional render nodes you could split up the render using the tiled camera object (in the objects library). Then you'll just have to assemble the tiles in PS and possibly do some retouching of the GI pass at the seams.

[jddog]

If you have NET and additional render nodes you could split up the render using the tiled camera object (in the objects library).

btw this is an excellent solution...

[Chrissyboy]

Hi sketchbook - remember these guys are used to dealing with photography, and that 3D imagery will be sharper and crisper than any photo ever - I quite often render under the stated spec and upsize in photoshop, the quality is fine.

400dpi implies they are printing with a 250-300 line screen ie extremely fine printing, on non-absorbent artboard or similar. If it's a poster then 200dpi would be perfectly acceptable, the difference will be imperceptable.

Cheers - Chris

i am rendering out some files for "print resolution" for my client, and it is taking forever. i mean, i have to set these things up at like 9000x7000 pixels with radiosity. it was slow when i was doing small renders, and now it's just unbarable.

any suggestions? the printer guy wants everything to be 400 dpi, but this is a nightmare.

my first render is on it's second pass and it's about 40% done. too bad the render status is not useful when figuring out how long something is going to take. it's at over 16 hours so far.

thanks

[jddog]

If it's a poster then 200dpi would be perfectly acceptable

yep I use a lot of 240 dpi and sometimes 150 dpi for HP plotter and work really fine

jdd

[imashination]

any suggestions? the printer guy wants everything to be 400 dpi, but this is a nightmare.

400dpi for what though? That is a VERY high number. Consider that magazine covers are typically 150dpi and never over 300dpi. Most viz work for clients is 150dpi or 300 if its a really important project.

[flingster]

really as the guys above say...around 257dpi is good enough quality....depending of course what its for.
the tiled camera is a good tip...but not sure how it deals with radiosity could be an issue...you might have to do a lightdome type setup...the good thing about the tiled camera setup is you can stop a render because as you say they can take ages and ages..i've had renders running for dayssssssss and it starts to get scary...the other thing is it becomes problematic multipass or file sizes in photoshop...and the final file write can often lead to memory problems.
you can spot pretty quickly though low HN settings so it can be a problem...just tweak any memory type this as with a smaller render to be honest. i haven't got a secret formula for how long things take i wish i had though.

[moka.studio]

Since you are on a deadline, then the suggestions of rendering at a smaller res, then modifying the image size are probably the best., THere is a plugin for photoshop ( Paying) that allows you to scale up your image with, suposedly a minimal loss of quality, up to like 200%. I can't remember the name of it though. Parhpas a search turns up something. But maybe this is to short a deadline for this.

[AdamT]

I think you're looking for "Genuine Fractals".

[Triker]

I am a graphic designer and have been doing print work for over 25 years. NO ONE ever needs more than 300dpi, I have never heard of a printer asking for 400 dpi before.Check with their pre-press dept., not a sales person. That said, give em what they want. This is what I alwyas do for print work: render at 200 dpi, then use "genuine fractals" to enlarge the image to the 400 dpi they are asking for. Once enlraged add a little noise in PS to give it the traditional film grain look. They will never now the difference. GF works awhole lot better than the Extensis tool for this, and much better than PS. If you do not want to spend the money on it, it (GF) comes with a 30 time use demo, so you could use it for this job.

If you use PS to do it, enlarge in multiple small increments, that is do 5%, then 5%, then 5% etc. Works better than just doing 200%

[elagman]

Sketchbook if you have to render that large do this. Set your image size at low 640 x 480 or smaller make sure save solution is on under radiosity. Set antialiasing to none. Render to your picture viewer. Now you have a saved radiosity solution that happened very quickly. Now go back to your radiosity settings change recalculate to never. Up your antialiasing to geometry or best. Change your output to what you need for your high res. 400 dpi sounds a bit much but whaterver they want I guess. Now render to picture viewer. You wont have to wait ages for your prepass and final pass. Only the final pass will be calculated esentially cutting a huge amount of time off your render. Hope this helps. :)

[sketchbook]

lots of great suggestions everyone. thanks

i too am a graphic designer, and 300 always has been fine. they are wanting to print super fine with over 200 line screen.

the Genuine fractals sounds like a plan. don't know what else i can do.

elagman - is this a solution which won't effect the final quality of the render? just saves time?

thanks!

[sketchbook]

so i just purchased genuine fractals. seams to work really nicely. my first render is just about finished (24 hours later). i may just render it again at 200 dpi instead of 400, and run CF on it to see what the difference is.

[flingster]

btw doesn't mean c4d couldn't be faster either or better at managing large renders...notice how everyone just jumps in and says drop quality cos its slow...effectively thats whats happening...speed vs quality..
if i wanna do a 600dpi art print don't tell me it won't look worse than a 200dpi print cos that simply isn't the case...however we aren't talking art print here...i swear i can tell the difference between a giclee at 257dpi and 300dpi...
we always here plenty of bashin about CA tools or flicker free GI...but c4d is used in for shed loads of print work and this sort of thing has been neglected for awhile...eg bucket rendering...NOT tiled camera..
anyway enough grumpyness from me today...someone knocked off my wing mirror and made my day!

[shakes]

I find cinema renders blow up really well-I had to do a job recently, final size 120 cm wide@600 dpi....! there was no way I could do it that size in time, and seemed pointless-I rendered it at 15 000 pix wide saved as 600dpi- came out about 60 cm wide-I then just doubled the size almost, a bit of unsharp mask and looked perfect.

[elagman]

Sketchbook I do that small prepass trick all the time, and it does not seem to affect quality. That being said I can not assure you 100% that having the prepass very tiny does not affect the final outcome once you render larger with the tiny saved solution.

Can anyone else who is more knowledgeable speak to this?

[Ollarin]

di you use hdri images can you fake the radisoty with a dome and play with lights, like Carles Piles (good tutorial in his web site...)
Could you perhaps point me to the direction of this tutorial? Sounds real good. :D

[jddog]

Since you are on a deadline, then the suggestions of rendering at a smaller res, then modifying the image size are probably the best., THere is a plugin for photoshop ( Paying) that allows you to scale up your image with, suposedly a minimal loss of quality, up to like 200%. I can't remember the name of it though. Parhpas a search turns up something. But maybe this is to short a deadline for this.


moka take a look at my mesage before your post, I've placed te link of this plug

[jddog]

Could you perhaps point me to the direction of this tutorial? Sounds real good. :D

http://www.carlespiles.com/

enjoy

jdd

[Ollarin]

Weee! Thanks Jddog! :bounce:

[rendermania]

I'm curious what sort of extra image detail comes out at 9000x7000 that isn't there in "lower res" renders (say 4000xsomething). Printers think that everything works like physical photography (e.g. photographic plate with extremely high information density ), hence the 400 dpi bull. My guess is that unless your bumps, textures and everything else is ultra highres, the extra pixels won't add anything spectular to the overall image.

[sketchbook]

good point. The printer is like the client. clueless.

[Triker]

i swear i can tell the difference between a giclee at 257dpi and 300dpi...
!

There is a huge difference between making a Giclee and printing four color process. Four color process at 200 line screen is comparable to a 150-175 dpi Giclee. A 400 dpi Giclee WILL look better than a 300 dpi Giclee.

[flingster]

hence i can tell the difference comment...but a bad comment on my part i guess....forgive me bud...i was having a bad day...someone swiped the wing mirror off my car and kinda topped off a bad day.
its was really a comment about the fact people always say its not necessary to do this or that...when "sometimes" it is necessary and it would be nice to have less struggle when trying to do it...i see loads of comments on ca or gi improvements all the time..and yet c4d is being used plenty for print work...which is definitely its forte imo...so i just wanna remind people of that fact thats all...everyone benefits with renderer improvements at the moment because there isn't any other renderer available at the moment. better memory management, bucket rendering would all help...i appreciate a lot of cg work is quality vs speed...but sometimes people want quality especially in art prints or print work and helping this is no bad thing..we should always look to improve things like this. everyone in this thread knows they have problems when they want to do huge renders...so there is no point in saying well don't do a large render then...sometimes this just isn't an option...so we should try and get things improved in this area...thats all bud..:shrug:

[sketchbook]

you guys are losing my on this Giclee stuff.

i am concerned that this lower res stuff will not blow up well. i tried a couple tests and was not impressed. it concerns me. i have a 200 dpi pagespread rendering now and it's going to be about a 40 hour render. if i make it 400 dpi, it's going to take an eternity.

time to call the client and give them the options.

[flingster]

you guys are losing my on this Giclee stuff.

i am concerned that this lower res stuff will not blow up well. i tried a couple tests and was not impressed. it concerns me. i have a 200 dpi pagespread rendering now and it's going to be about a 40 hour render. if i make it 400 dpi, it's going to take an eternity.

time to call the client and give them the options.
sorry bud...ignore my comments..weren't mean't to confuse issue.
talk to your client...do some tests...and get some proofs maybe.
:shrug:

[wuensch]

---or outsource to a render farm---
for stuff like that definitely an option--
did that in the times when 1000 Mhz was a lot just to be able to deliver.
Was hires posters, too (pre-radiosity times, but you could get a render to take forever than, too.

What I would do if renderfarm is no option:

render 2 passes, one for radiosity with low res Radiosity as extra layer., one in final res without radiosity .

In PS push up the radiosity layer and place it over your render, screen mode, maybe retouch the radiosity layer when artifacts appear.

This saved my hide a couple of times and since only the rad layer is pushed up it is not very likely to show.

Also a dding a bit of noise in the final is agood idea anyway, to avoid color bending artifacts that can appear in large gradients (as said above).

Olli

[sketchbook]

thanks for the help. when you say 2 passes, is this in the same render? or 2 completely different renders? how would use do different resolutions in 1 multipass rendering?

thanks

[Hilt]

Someone mentioned using Lizardtech's Genuine Fractals to upscale the finished image.
Highly recommended solution, but instead of GF I ended up using Photozoom. After some serious testing (my poor calculator-wannabe.computer cant handle huge renderings) Photozoom appeared to beat GF with clear margin.

Hope your computer dont crash when rendering 60hrs job :)

.hilt

[moka.studio]

Adam, that't is: Genuine Fractals !
Jddog thanks for the link to PXL smartscale ( though I was thinking of G F), I overlooked it at first.
Doe snayone knwo how those 2 compare?
Sketchbook, what is your verdict on Genuine Fractals.
This would be interesting to hear,
jp

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.