PDA

View Full Version : Is LW9 really faster???


DMack
07-17-2006, 06:07 PM
Hi all,

I've got LW9 recently and thought I'd do a few render tests on projects that I am currently working on. To my surprise and extreme dissappointment LW9 has, in THREE real life tests been SLOWER than LW8.5. I can't post the scenes as they are commercial projects but the last one I tested went from 7:39mins under LW85 to 10:25mins under LW9?? Now these scenes use raytraced shadows. I'm using the perspective camera under LW9 (that's the faster one right??). Now I understand that the increase in rendering speed is all to do with raytracing BUT these are real life projects that are doing some raytracing and I'm getting LONGER rendering times! So I guess my question is....Is this happening to anyone else on real life projects?

Got to say that from a render speed point of view, I am bitterly dissappointed so far.

Edit: Removal of red face

Signal2Noise
07-17-2006, 06:16 PM
Have you brought this observation up with NewTek? Or even posted this in the NewTek forums or Beta area (if you're registered as a beta user)?

Overall, through the beta phases I found speed to be hit & miss. The final release candidate was suppose to have the majority ( a huge majority) of bugs resolved. Now that 9 is out I have installed it but haven't had a chance to use it full swing yet.

When you say you're rendering a scene are you talking times for a whole scene (final output) or a frame? A 3 minute differential for a scene is kind of moot but if it's per frame than that's severe molasses and worth reporting to NT.

DMack
07-17-2006, 06:28 PM
I wasn't on the beta group - It's my full time job and I simply can't afford to run beta's. The 3 mins is unfortunately per frame. On another test I did, I went from 41:24mins under LW85 to 48:43mins under LW9 perspective camera! I then tried LW9 under classic camera and got 42:xxmins. Now that scene had a LOT of geometry (about 1.6Million polies), lots of texturing and an area shadow...so that would require some ray tracing so again - I'm baffled. So many people have been going on and on about how fast it is....I'm just wondering if these super speed increases have actually made it into the release (RC23 isn't it).

BazC
07-17-2006, 06:55 PM
Unfortunately this isn't straightforward. Yes the perspective camera is the one that shows the biggest speed increase BUT only with suitable scenes. From what I understand that means lots of polys (millions) and/or intensive ray tracing. On simpler scenes the classic camera will be faster. There are also quite a few scenes which are actually slower in LW9 (the raytrace.lws in content for instance) It seems that the pre render calculations in LW9 are more complex and so can actually increase the render time on scenes that already render quite quickly. The idea is that saving hours on long renders of complex scenes is worth adding a little time to fast renders of simple scenes.

You wouldn't happen to be using a Mac would you? The slow down of simple scenes seems to be minimal on Windows but much more significant on Mac.

DMack
07-17-2006, 07:02 PM
On windows 32bit. I guess it's back to classic camera then. I was so looking forward to the render farm being 2-4 times faster!

I have to wonder if, on the mainstay of commercial projects, these speed increases will ever be seen or whether it only really appears in 'extreme tech demo's'.

So far has ANYONE actually done render tests LW85 Vs LW9 (the launched one) on commercial projects and got faster renders?

This would be really interesting to see.....

schuubars
07-17-2006, 07:22 PM
It doesn't matter if it's a commercial project or not to compare lw8.x vs lw9.
In the beta forums are several posts with good comparisons, some test scenes are really faster and some slightly slower.

Hey even from the LW9 Bonus Content there are some scenes that render slow because they are not optimized.(20-50 percent giveaways)


Sorry can't help to compare, because i have 8.x not anymore on my HDD, because in much cases LW9 is equal/slightly, or much faster, as someone said it depends on the scene, and in some cases classic is faster than the new camera modes.

Niklas Collin
07-17-2006, 07:29 PM
With 3M+ polygons and 100+ lights and using quad opteron render time advantage from 8.5 -> 9.0 is over 3 times faster (using shadowmaps a lot too, guessing it would be even higher without those). On a commercial project. Nuff said, use more lights or turn radiosity on and you WILL notice a difference. If not, then I'm a bit baffled.

DMack
07-17-2006, 07:30 PM
Anyone else?

Cageman
07-17-2006, 07:40 PM
Got a scene where the rendertime per frame is:

LW8.3: 10m 57s
LW9.0: 06m 35s (Perspective camera).

The scene has 21 lights, not all are casting shadows, but some are raytraced shadows, some are shadowmaps. I also got some reflection and refraction in there. Around 500.000 polygons in total.

Also, it seems the antialias is slightly better in LW9.0?

lots
07-17-2006, 08:23 PM
Another thing to consider is your thread count. Traditionally in LW, the splitting of a frame for rendering over multiple CPUs was highly inefficient. By this I mean that if you had 2 CPUs and set the thread count to 2, the renderer simply split the frame in half horizontally, and gave one CPU the top and the other the bottom. If the top of the scene was more complex, it would take a longer time to render than the bottom half, thus leaving a CPU sitting idle doing nothing. Thus many people recommended having two or even 4 times the threads for the number of CPUs you had. This allowed the frame to be broken down into more segments, which allowed the CPUs to be doing something more often than not.

The new render engine you get while using the Perspective camera is highly efficient (in terms of threading). For example, if you have two CPUs, the render begins as normal, splitting the frame in half, one half for each CPU. If one CPU finishes its segment before the other, the remaining area to be rendered is split in half, and the idle CPU begins working on half of the remaining area. This repeates until nothing is left to render. As you can imagine this makes things go by much more quickly.

The down sides are the drawbacks of setting a higher thread count than what you have available on your machine. What I mean is there is a certain overhead (cost) to splitting the frame up into multiple threads. The more you split the frame up into more threads, the more time it will take to render, and the more overhead there will need to be to manage the threads. Thus while using the perspective camera it is best to always use the number of threads you have CPUs for. If you have 2 Cores then set the threads to 2. If you have 2 cores and set the threads higher, you will experience a slow down. In LW 8.5 the gains from increasing thread count above the CPUs you had was almost always positive in relation to the overhead it cost to do so.

I'm not saying that it will beat out LW 8.5 in some cases, but it will become relativly close in performance. In one of the threads on the OB forum, I conducted a few tests with LW 9's perspective camera. I first ran the sample scene with 8 threads on my dual opteron box. Every time I lowered the threads closer to my CPU count (2) the time improved by a minute to two minutes. I wasnt able to quite match the 8.5 render speed for this particular sample scene, but it was relativly close (within a minute or so).

PixelInfected
07-17-2006, 08:43 PM
my experience is a faster rendering than lw 8.5, but my test are on subdivision render, where i found acceleration x2 x5 but not in all scenes.

i test only with classic camera, and advanced camera not with perspective camera, be cause i'm not interested to it, but all my work see benefits of lw9.

i used a lot of ray tracing and high poly number.

important thing is that i talk about lw64bit, that is faster on same computer than lw32bit.

DMack
07-17-2006, 08:59 PM
Thanks for the explanation 'lots'.

'PixelInfected' - why the avoidance of perspective camera?

PixelInfected
07-17-2006, 11:12 PM
be cause i use it for fx, and perspective camera is a faked camera, i prefer new advanced camera, that work like optical bank, and is more confortable to use for matching fx with live action.
i not avoid perspective, i not use it for render.
;-)

Buzzoff
07-18-2006, 03:08 AM
Why the need for the mod edit to the title? I can't believe that this group has become THAT insecure that a mod had to dismiss all doubt about the new release. I only looked into this thread because I wanted to see concerns, not more mindless cheerleading.

devin
07-18-2006, 03:25 AM
Why the need for the mod edit to the title?

I thought that it was a bit odd as well.

I too was a little concerned after loading up a number of old scenes at work with no significant decreases in time. In fact, I experienced just the opposite, something very worrisome since render time is what I sold the upgrade to my boss on. I'd definitely like to see more discussion on this topic. Obviously, the render time statements have some merit as proven by a number of users, but it would be good to narrow down which scenes I should be opting for the perspective camera on. I really don't have time to test camera settings for each and every scene that I load up.

DMack
07-18-2006, 07:56 AM
RobertoOritz,

I am dissappointed that you feel it is 'necessary' to edit my title. My concerns are legitimate and dicussed in a sensible way. The title before was NOT inflammatory. I would ask that you remove your edit to the title and let this legitimate discussion continue without unecessary interference.

mav3rick
07-18-2006, 08:31 AM
oh cmon dmack

lightwolf
07-18-2006, 08:33 AM
I've had a real world scene go from 18 minutes down to 3 minutes... 2.4 million polygons, 3 area lights, backdrop GI, 7-pass PLD AA, motion blur, raytraced reflections, 1024x576.

I've yet to find a production scene that renders slower in LW 9.0, but I'll look out for it.

Cheers,
Mike

DMack
07-18-2006, 08:54 AM
Ok, Cool, maybe my nexr project will show some improved speed. Was that using the prespective camera or the classic?

mav3rick - I just see it as unecessary and to be honest a bit irritating, that's all. This is a discussion area and it should be open and unedited so long as there is positive purpose. In my opinion, the Moderator has been over zealous and he should recognise that and remove the edit. But hey, there are worse things happening in the world!

lightwolf
07-18-2006, 09:34 AM
Ok, Cool, maybe my nexr project will show some improved speed. Was that using the prespective camera or the classic?

Perspective, mainly because it handles multiple threads a lot better, and doesn't render geometry that will later not be visible in the final image (think of a huge groudplane that has shadows cast on it for example, using the classuc camera, LW will sometimes render the plane first, and then the objects on it which hide parts of the plane from view).

Cheers,
Mike

Paul-Angelo
07-18-2006, 09:58 AM
RobertoOritz, my title. My concerns are legitimate and dicussed in a sensible way. The title before was NOT inflammatory. I would ask that you remove your edit to the title and let this legitimate discussion continue without unecessary interference.

If they are being discussed in a sensible way then why the angry face on the thread title? That already offers an opinion before reading the thread. Just throwing in my 2 cents :D

Tama
07-18-2006, 12:31 PM
Roberto did the right thing imho. Even prior to reading the originally titled thread I saw the angry face on the title and felt that it was going to be just a pot stirrer.

Buzzoff
07-18-2006, 01:14 PM
I thought that it was a bit odd as well.

Or if there is a need for someone to play with the title how about "Mod Edit: Yes...and No" or better yet, leave it alone.

Signal2Noise
07-18-2006, 02:38 PM
What's even funnier is the fact that "apparently" is spelled wrong. Makes the thread title seem amateurish*. The title was fine the way it was pre-modedit, imo. That's why I responded to it. The thread was being conducted in a constructive and non-flammatory context to begin with. If people are concerned about the angry face smiley then perhaps all negative "smilies" should be removed from the selection panel.

If this thread was on NewTek's forum I'm sure it would have been left alone from moderator intervention. More so, Chuck or Kurt would have popped in and given their take on the speed issue and all would be good.

That's my 2 pennies anyway.

*Normally, I ignore threads that have spelling mistakes in the title. It's a peeve of mine. :)

freakmoomin
07-18-2006, 02:44 PM
Ive not had the opertunity of trying out LW 9 yet, but hopefully its got a lot more going for it aswell as improved renderspeeds.

I was also a little confused about the MOD changing the title? There seemed nothing wrong with it to me?

If it were only LW fan boys posting there views then it wouldnt be a discussion and LW would never get better........

if there is certain people getting slower rendertimes then it would be good to get it resolved now rather than newtek thinking everything is ok and maybe its not......

I hope this is just a tech issue or a certain type of scene where the rendertimes are slower but just incase it isnt then it would be good to investigate

DMack
07-18-2006, 03:20 PM
Tama and Paul Angelo,

I was genuinely dissappointed by the performance, hence the red face. That's what the faces are for right? I mean they're there as a general indication of the thrust of the thread. If use of the angry face constitutes something that requires intervention then WOW, it needs to be removed from the system.

I just don't get your point.

Back on topic.

I'll do a few more render tests and see what results I get.

Phyrea
07-18-2006, 03:46 PM
I've had mixed results myself. I'm still trying to come up with some solid numbers that I can post (just haven't had time to do real unbiased tests). Someone (non-NewTek) just posted a test they did on the NewTek forums that saw a 16x increase in speed (something like 13 minutes in 8.5 to 50 seconds in 9.0). So there are certainly some situations that are vastly improved by 9.0.

Cageman
07-18-2006, 04:25 PM
I've had mixed results myself. I'm still trying to come up with some solid numbers that I can post (just haven't had time to do real unbiased tests). Someone (non-NewTek) just posted a test they did on the NewTek forums that saw a 16x increase in speed (something like 13 minutes in 8.5 to 50 seconds in 9.0). So there are certainly some situations that are vastly improved by 9.0.

During the beta there was a guy who posted an image that took about 64 minutes in LW8.5 and just about 3 minutes in LW9. Alot of transparent stuff with raytracing if I remeber correctly.

However, lets not forget those that experiece a slowdown. I have a couple of very, very simple scenes that renders slightly slower in LW9 Classic Camera compared to LW8.3, and a little bit more slower with Perspective Camera. Overall I have seen a speed-increase with LW9. One obvious thing is of course the polycount, but it seems that heavy scenes can see a slowdown as well, but I, personally, havn't experienced it.

red_oddity
07-18-2006, 04:40 PM
Well, i found out (during the beta cycle) that Perspective Camera loves sh!teloads of polygons (especially with transparancy on 'm, and reflection and refraction don't often have a big impact)
I'v rendered a scene with about 1.2 milion polygons in the background and about 100.000 to 200.000 polygons per tree (leaves with transparancy maps), there where about 7 trees in there, it went from 40 to 60 minutes per frame with LW 8.5 and Classic Camera to 7 to 15 minutes per frame with LW9 and Perspective Camera...

I'd say that is a pretty big step forward, especially with shots that are over 1500 frames long and looming deadlines, sorry it didn't work for your scenes, but maybe you just have a scene that doesn't take advantage of the new features.

freakmoomin
07-18-2006, 04:54 PM
The thing that bothers me is when people say they have longer render times? if someone has a simple scene which doesnt involve raytracing or transparcy or whatever then a similar render time is fair enough but if LW 9 is taking longer in some cases then thats a little strange, even if it is a simple scene.

i cant really comment as i havent Tried 9 myself, so im hoping this is down to individule user errors and these tests are a little off.

some of the render speed increases sound brill so i hope its all good ;-)

Cageman
07-18-2006, 05:07 PM
The thing that bothers me is when people say they have longer render times? if someone has a simple scene which doesnt involve raytracing or transparcy or whatever then a similar render time is fair enough but if LW 9 is taking longer in some cases then thats a little strange, even if it is a simple scene.

i cant really comment as i havent Tried 9 myself, so im hoping this is down to individule user errors and these tests are a little off.

some of the render speed increases sound brill so i hope its all good ;-)

I think the slower rendertimes are because of the KD-shadertree. Of what I understand, it optimizes the scene at rendertime, regardless of content, and then renders it. These optimizations are not aware of the how complex the scene is, which in the end gives good speed to complex scenes, but simple scenes are still otpimized (i.e taking time) and in the end it actually renders slower than LW8.x that doesn't do this kind of calculation.

I'm no programmer, so I don't actually know what I'm talking about... but it is a theory.. ;)

DMack
07-18-2006, 05:08 PM
Hey cool! Keep these positive posts coming. Sooner or later we'll figure out exactly when to use perspective camera and when to use classic camera (and possibly when to use LW8.5 :scream: )

CaptainObvious
07-18-2006, 06:18 PM
I think the slower rendertimes are because of the KD-shadertree. Of what I understand, it optimizes the scene at rendertime, regardless of content, and then renders it. These optimizations are not aware of the how complex the scene is, which in the end gives good speed to complex scenes, but simple scenes are still otpimized (i.e taking time) and in the end it actually renders slower than LW8.x that doesn't do this kind of calculation.

I'm no programmer, so I don't actually know what I'm talking about... but it is a theory.. ;)
That's about it, yes. It's like the "extra raytracing optimization" in Lightwave 8, but to a greater degree. On a complex scene with little raytracing (few refractions and no GI) in LW8, your scene will often render a lot slower with it turned on. With more intensive raytracing, the extra time spent on raytracing optimizations pays off better. In LW9 with the perspective camera, this is true to a greater degree.

But I don't see why it should take all that long to do the BSP tree. There have been proofs-of-concept that generate BSP trees in real-time with a hundred thousand polygons or so.

biliousfrog
07-18-2006, 06:53 PM
This is great to know as we tend to work on fairly simple scenes & LW 9 could potentially be a step backwards with regards to render times so I won't be in any hurry to get our boss to upgrade.

I'd just like to say that I think the Mod edit is a joke, this Lightwave forum is getting rediculous. "Apparently yes...." well, it would appear that only on certain scenes so I disagree with that statement. It hasn't added anything to the title or discussion except trying to belittle the original post & its creator. Seems like typical school-boy-bully behaviour & it wouldn't be tolerated by "normal" members. By all means remove the angry face if it's deemed offensive but adding a p!$$y remark just because someone is questioning one of Newtek's claims is pathetic.

devin
07-18-2006, 07:08 PM
At the day job we tend to have quick turnarounds and avoid most of the raytracing options unless there's a lengthy deadline. Even then it's a gamble as last minute revisions tend to occur. I'm happy to get version 9 and all its nifty new features but would have loved some clarication (and still would) on the render time boosts, when to use the Persp. Camera, etc. This really was a selling point for the upgrade to my company which I now have to explain.

BTW, I'm not saying that Newtek was misleading, just that there should have been a lot more clarification. I appreciate the input so far and agree that it would be cool to have a list of circumstances in which we know that the Persp. Cam will, in fact, PROBABLY give us that boost that we've been looking forward to.

richcz3
07-18-2006, 08:06 PM
LW9 does offer improvements for high poly complex scenes as mentioned. Does that make it perfect? - No way. But looking at the bigger picture the long term benefits outweigh the drawbacks especially if you are debating doing more complex commercial work.

My suggestion is keep previous versions of LW installed sharing the same content libraries to eliminate content redudnecy. If people are doing critical work that isn't heavily reliant on 3rd party plugins, that is the best way to ensure their renders on older scenes don't become impractical.

Unfortuntely I understand the Mod edit to some degree.
There are those on this board that are bent on LW skewerings. Given the opportunity for the title to go as it was, was an open invitation for a bruising sans all the facts.

pixym
07-18-2006, 08:22 PM
Earl from Newtek Forum asked me to post this example here:

A simple 1 pass AA PLD Archi Viz test
Nearly 16 times faster...

LW 8.3: 13mn29sec
LW 9.0: 0mn51sec

Edit: Sorry for the bad quality screen shot

devin
07-19-2006, 06:10 AM
Wow. Thanks for posting Eddy.

I guess that I'll stick with the Classic Cam at work unless there's a special circumstance but look forward to taking advantage of the Persp. Cam on my projects at home.

biliousfrog
07-19-2006, 06:26 AM
That's very impressive & very relevent as we work in arch. viz. Unfortunately the majority of our work are still images of bland, residential properties in the UK but for the occasional "decent" job those kind of render times would be excellent.

I know that it might not be "fair" but, IMO, relevent.......has anyone done some tests against an FPrime render? I ask because we tend to render with FPrime almost exclusively as it is soooo much faster at high-poly, high-radiosity renders but doesn't support LW shaders etc. & doesn't like large renders. So from our point of view, would there be much benefit in switching from FPrime renders to LW9 renders regarding speed?

ThE_JacO
07-19-2006, 06:40 AM
That's about it, yes. It's like the "extra raytracing optimization" in Lightwave 8, but to a greater degree. On a complex scene with little raytracing (few refractions and no GI) in LW8, your scene will often render a lot slower with it turned on. With more intensive raytracing, the extra time spent on raytracing optimizations pays off better. In LW9 with the perspective camera, this is true to a greater degree.

But I don't see why it should take all that long to do the BSP tree. There have been proofs-of-concept that generate BSP trees in real-time with a hundred thousand polygons or so.

regardless of proof of concept technologies (hundred thousand polys in realtime isn't proof of concept, it's pretty normal for a decent BSP), things like these should be exposed to the user control.

if you don't wan to run a discretization process on the scene, because you know you can (and maybe even need) to bruteforce dump all the contents in memory space anyway, you should be able to set the branches to 1 and the leaf to something enormous.
the same goes for a KDtree, which I believe is the way newtek decided to go, over binary partitioning, for v9.

this will bring down to roughly 16cpu cycles the generation of the voxels/partitions/LUTs and nullify the speed loss on simple scenes, if it really is correlated to scene parsing, which I hope it isn't, because it would pinpoint a rather shoddy work in the pre-processor of the rendering engine.

if that control isn't there then you should simply ask newtek to expose it.

Cageman
07-19-2006, 07:49 AM
Earl from Newtek Forum asked me to post this example here:

A simple 1 pass AA PLD Archi Viz test
Nearly 16 times faster...

LW 8.3: 13mn29sec
LW 9.0: 0mn51sec

Edit: Sorry for the bad quality screen shot

Ohh..wasn't this posted in the OB-forum? :) A hell of a speedboost on that one!

tais
07-19-2006, 08:54 AM
pixim do you have transparent double-side reflection poly in your lw8.5 scene?
If yes, would you re-render with check the double-side off. in both lw8.5 & lw9?
merci!
(le rendu de la 8.5 me parait anormalement long, j'avais reperé un ralentissement important avec les poly transparent en doubleside... ca vaut le coup d'essayer..)

Ed Bittner
07-20-2006, 02:14 PM
Well, maybe I should bring up my experience. In 8.5, I had a very poly heavy scene which took 17:48 to render a frame. Raytraced everything was on. OK, 9 beta comes out and, (drum roll), 2:38 to render a frame. Same everything, except perspective camera was used. Looks exactly the same. Exactly. Now over a 450 frame animation, that's one insane boost. I've used the perspective cam on other scenes, with no real change on the render hit. At least we have the option now. I just have to get more experienced with the new tools.

E.

stooch
07-20-2006, 03:52 PM
i too had longer times on production scenes. but i guess it is faster since the moderator says so.

btw, the whole angry red face point is irrelevant when the actual edit basically contradicted the findings on the original poster. so its not about he red face, its about bad moderation. personally im going to stick to LW forums seems that they are much more fairly moderated (and should be an example to the moderator here).

Cageman
07-20-2006, 04:29 PM
i too had longer times on production scenes. but i guess it is faster since the moderator says so.

Don't be silly. Most people see a speedboost. No doubt there are scenes that render slower, but from my experience, those are the rare ones, not the other way around.

About moderation:

I've seen a guy that constantly jumps into threads in this LW-forum and rants about how great x-software is and how crap LW is, and when done, he jumps out. That guy is probably one of the reasons why moderation in this LW-forum are so strict and tight at times.

DMack
07-20-2006, 04:54 PM
I'll add a bit.....

The moderator asked for the issue of the title edit to be addressed via PM. I've did that a couple(?) of days ago with a reasonable explanation and a request to have the edit removed and have received no answer. Needless to say I am dissappointed.

The title edit at the end of the day is not a biggie but it was, IMO, a very poor judgement. I can see no reason why it should have ever been changed. I do not, as far as I am aware, have a history of needless LW bashing. It is just a shame that the moderator has not rectified this decision.

stooch
07-20-2006, 05:48 PM
I am sorry for the disagreement, but the moderation to the thread
is not going to be changed.


As stated before, the thread moderation was done for TONE reasons
(The reasons that are stated quite well in Cageman's post).

I am sorry to disapoint some, but that is my call, the objections are ON RECORD,
so lets get back ON TOPIC.

-R

nah id rather go and post elsewhere because of the atmosphere you created, namely at the LW forums where you should look around and take a few pointers.

RobertoOrtiz
07-20-2006, 05:49 PM
Earl from Newtek Forum asked me to post this example here:

A simple 1 pass AA PLD Archi Viz test
Nearly 16 times faster...

LW 8.3: 13mn29sec
LW 9.0: 0mn51sec

Edit: Sorry for the bad quality screen shot

Thanks for sharing man.
Any other test scenes?



-R

DMack
07-20-2006, 06:11 PM
As stated before, the thread moderation was done for TONE reasons
-R

Given that this "was" my topic, I think I am entitled to stray a little and say that I think your reply here is ridiculous! My 'tone' was completely justified based on my experiences to that point. At the end of my post, was "So I guess my question is....Is this happening to anyone else on real life projects?". Get it? That simple - I wanted to know what other users were experiencing, was it just me? Maybe a setup thing? Was it a new default setting? - To me one of the main reasons for having any type of forum.

So to avoid any more interference, what 'tone' is acceptable? A fanboy one? Maybe the red face should be banned from the LW forum?

Just plain bang out of order! Yes, now I am angry! And yes, this gets a red face, why? Because that's what they are there for!

RobertoOrtiz
07-20-2006, 06:18 PM
I think the slower rendertimes are because of the KD-shadertree. Of what I understand, it optimizes the scene at rendertime, regardless of content, and then renders it. These optimizations are not aware of the how complex the scene is, which in the end gives good speed to complex scenes, but simple scenes are still otpimized (i.e taking time) and in the end it actually renders slower than LW8.x that doesn't do this kind of calculation.

I'm no programmer, so I don't actually know what I'm talking about... but it is a theory.. ;)

Maybe you could some experiments on this...

Anyone else having rendering problems? If so, any theories why?

-R

DMack
07-20-2006, 06:31 PM
'Problems' - Whooa steady! That kind of 'tone' could get you 'edited' around here!

Ironically, your special edit has kept that angry face around the top of the stack for a lot longer than it would have been.

That's it from me, I can't be bothered with it any more.

RobertoOrtiz
07-20-2006, 06:43 PM
During the beta there was a guy who posted an image that took about 64 minutes in LW8.5 and just about 3 minutes in LW9. Alot of transparent stuff with raytracing if I remeber correctly.

However, lets not forget those that experiece a slowdown. I have a couple of very, very simple scenes that renders slightly slower in LW9 Classic Camera compared to LW8.3,....

Could you post some examples?

Thanks.

-R

Cageman
07-20-2006, 07:50 PM
Here are some examples that shows how LW9.0 rendertime is compared to LW8.3. Also, if you can notice on these screengrabs... LW8.3 render have some black noise on the balls, while LW9.0 doesn't. Used Perspective camera in LW9.0.

Cageman
07-20-2006, 07:54 PM
Here we have an example where LW8.3 is almost twice as fast as LW9.0 Perspective camera on a very simple scene, however, using the Classic camera in LW9.0 was only slightly slower than LW8.3.

This is one of the scenes that was alot slower in LW9.0 during the beta-cycle. And since I heard some people complain about slower renderers in LW9, I assumed that these scenes should have been slower in LW9.0 than they actually are. Good! :)

Cageman
07-20-2006, 08:12 PM
Forgot this one. All those soccerballs again, but this time in LW9.0 with Classic Camera. Slower than LW8.3.

Cageman
07-20-2006, 08:24 PM
'Problems' - Whooa steady! That kind of 'tone' could get you 'edited' around here!

Ironically, your special edit has kept that angry face around the top of the stack for a lot longer than it would have been.

That's it from me, I can't be bothered with it any more.

Well, to be honest... when I first saw the thread my initial thought was: Ohh noo... not another "LW-sucks, xxx-app rulez" thread.

It turned out to be one of the better threads over here, well.. until all this bitching about moderation came in.

You may not know about it, but around LW8-release, there were so many fights here, that CGSociety were about to close down all LW-related forums. But they didn't do that, but they did change the way they moderate things here. Who's fault is that? I don't know, but since the moderation changed here, things have been calmer.

So... don't give up on this thread, hopefully it will be very informative without any fighting or bitching over issues that really doesn't have anything to do with the content of this thread.

DMack
07-20-2006, 09:18 PM
Thanks Cageman, I won't completely give up on this area but I have to say that my enthusiam, for the first time, has been dented. I'll probably sign up on the Newtek forum and post there instead. Quick quote "It turned out to be one of the better threads over here, well.. until all this bitching about moderation came in." and see it another way - "....until the title was edited" I mean look at all the few following threads - ALL constructive. Yes, I was dissappointed (I think understandibly) and yes that came out BUT if it had been a simple LW is crap and app XXX is sooo much better then I don't think I would have got the positive feedback, I'd have probably got some angry replies. I have no history of generalised LW bashing (100% income from LW for the last 8 or 9 years, four or so licenses at one point) and I don't expect to be treated as someone who has. To me, the simple fact is that it was an exceptionally poor decision to edit the title, aggrevated by the fact that the moderator has not had the good grace to accept that. Then the sudden 'interest' in the thread, whose title so upset him - just plain fake.

Heh, I said that was it fom me - but hey, I appreciated your comment and thought I'd get back to you. :)

pixym
07-20-2006, 09:30 PM
pixim do you have transparent double-side reflection poly in your lw8.5 scene?
If yes, would you re-render with check the double-side off. in both lw8.5 & lw9?
merci!
(le rendu de la 8.5 me parait anormalement long, j'avais reperé un ralentissement important avec les poly transparent en doubleside... ca vaut le coup d'essayer..)
Salut Tais :)

I do not remember to have double-sided reflection...
I will check this at work, right now I am on my bed
If you want I can send you the archiviz scene...

Bliz
07-20-2006, 09:38 PM
I've only worked on one scene in LW9 so far and have had good results.

I haven't got around to rendering this scene on LW8.5 yet - sorry will do a bit later and edit the post.

I use the spinning light trick in my work a lot which uses 100% raytraced shadows.

The scene is question was created in 8.5 so when I first loaded it up it was set up with a classic camera. My machine is a Dual Xeon with hyperthreading turned on so LW 'sees' 4 cpu's thus I set the render to 4 threads.

scene was 1.5million polys

classic camera, enhanced -AA 8min. 14s.
perspective camera, same AA 4min. 24s.

so for me, a good speed increase of nearly 50% ...
...BUT the interesting thing is that some of my geometry wasn't a closed shell. Imagine a dumptruck without the inside of the dumper modeled. The model in that state gave me the 4m24s time above and then I finished modeling the inside of the dumpster (adding polygons) the render speed reduced further to bang on 4min. exactly.

So I have to conclude that the perspective camera is faster when geometry is closed. Must help the raytracing calculations?

pixym
07-20-2006, 09:39 PM
Ohh..wasn't this posted in the OB-forum? :) A hell of a speedboost on that one!

Yes, it was 12 times faster... if I remember correctly.

Bytehawk
07-20-2006, 11:41 PM
me too, I can vouch for the massive speed increases for the type of work i do (print work mostly, heavy poly scenes). Most of the time final renders are 3 times faster.

nowadays I don't even bother loading 8.5 to compare, I know 9 will be faster anyway.

Freak!!
07-20-2006, 11:58 PM
I believe the new Perspective Camera has indeed shown to be quite a lot faster, than the Classic Camera, there is no doubt. Moving to a new KD-Tree system means a lot of possible advantages over the old camera system. Generally the more complexity the better the scaling in performance. Generally this is the trend. That obviously leaves a gap at the smaller end of the spectrum, which means simpler test renders or less complex scenes will be have a slightly bigger overhead than before. That combined (i personally believe) with the new renderstats panel in LW9, which i also believe ad's a slight lag compared to LW8.x. I wish that was left as an option. However there is no doubt on some, if not most more complex scenes LW9 is a signfigant rendering speed advantage. It's not uncommon to see 5x speed advantage on a lot of my own scenes. Which when combined with unlimited nodes on a renderfarm is a useful timesaver. Smarter multithreading in LW9 also makes a difference to speed over LW8.x, So 9.0 is faster, no question.

(PS. CGTalk is overmoderated in general, and i'm not sure i like the idea of people changing the thread title, over the poster in this instance.) However NT always have said the new camera is not always going to be 2x or better, in some scenes it may be slower and this is not uncommon or unusual to any other software or even LW release. So i'm not sure if there was really a question, that hadn't already been answered quite clearley in many releases up to the release of Lightwave9.0 and KD-Tree addition. You can still use LW8.x alongside of 9.x as well.. :) My 0.2 cents....

RobertoOrtiz
07-21-2006, 01:58 AM
The thread has been restored to its original title.
-R

Ed Bittner
07-21-2006, 02:39 AM
The thread has been restored to its original title.
-R

I salute you.
E.

prajna
07-21-2006, 04:33 AM
The thread has been restored to its original title.
-R


I am also glad to hear this. This has been a very constructive thread.

prajna
07-21-2006, 04:35 AM
By the way, I'm having the feeling that I may have stolen someone else's avatar. Does anyone know if this has already been taken by someone else in CGtalk?

DMack
07-21-2006, 06:39 AM
The thread has been restored to its original title.
-R

Thank you.

Edit: I have removed the red face as a gesture of goodwill.
2nd Edit: Though it appears to remain in the global listing for some reason?

biliousfrog
07-21-2006, 09:01 AM
...BUT the interesting thing is that some of my geometry wasn't a closed shell. Imagine a dumptruck without the inside of the dumper modeled. The model in that state gave me the 4m24s time above and then I finished modeling the inside of the dumpster (adding polygons) the render speed reduced further to bang on 4min. exactly.

So I have to conclude that the perspective camera is faster when geometry is closed. Must help the raytracing calculations?

This sounds interesting, has anyone else had experience with this? I wonder whether it has something to do with working out vertex maps or something too? Would be nice to hear from someone at Newtek about when to use the different camera types....they seem to assume a lot of things rather than just freely giving the information, such as using uncompressed image formats when texturing, that's saved me a lot of render hassles but I only found out about that on here.

Thanks for restoring the title.

DMack
07-21-2006, 09:17 AM
OT: What's with the compressed image formats (are you talkin jpeg etc?)

Whoooa! That close poly thing is VERY interesting, the render I did that jumped from 41mins to 48mins under LW9 was one big open basin in effect, 1.6M polies worth of 'unclosed shell'. Now that would be really interesting to do a really crude 'close' and see what happens to RT. Percentage wise, that really is a significant saving!

T4D
07-21-2006, 10:44 AM
Edited ->

My LW 9 feelings are now here (http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?p=3725389#post3725389)

No problem guys :thumbsup:

ThE_JacO
07-21-2006, 11:19 AM
This sounds interesting, has anyone else had experience with this? I wonder whether it has something to do with working out vertex maps or something too? Would be nice to hear from someone at Newtek about when to use the different camera types....they seem to assume a lot of things rather than just freely giving the information, such as using uncompressed image formats when texturing, that's saved me a lot of render hassles but I only found out about that on here.

Thanks for restoring the title.

these things can happen.
it's my understanding that one of the new things in v9 is that the rendering engine finally performs a proper sorting of the scene into a KDtree. In an ideal world this shouldn't have an impact at all, but in the real one very often these algorithms are either flawed in certain situations, optimized leaning too harshly in one direction (and lacking in another) or sometimes plain buggy.

IE: BSP trees (and KDtrees too to an extent) for raytracing fall apart in the ball&stadium situation, which is a high density ball in the middle of a low poly stadium.
the tremendously different density in different areas will either force a lot of branching off or create leaves that are too large to be conveniently handled.

In this case, closing a model might very well have helped the sorting of the scene to determine an ideal scenario much faster instead of forcing it into too many iterations.

nothing particularly odd there, except that a difference that radical means that the sorting and population management algorithms could be developed much, much better. On the bright side, it means that given enough time and polishing things will progress further, as the actual state is obviously not at that point where the performance/technology limits plateau yet.

zapper1998
07-21-2006, 11:24 AM
Been doing some testing on my machine....
"Dual Opteron, 8 Gig ram, Win XP_ 64 Pro"
Have done some Scenes, rendered in 8.5 and the New LW_9, And found that LW_9 is Faster.

When the scene is vast, I did some cloning, scenes were at over 6 million polys, and rendered faster than the original 300,000 poly scene, using Perspective Cam in LW_9 and Classic in 8.5.

LW_9 render's faster as the polys get higher in poly count, did a final scene test with 20 million polys, rendered faster than the scene of 300,000 poly scene in 8.5...


Michael

schuubars
07-21-2006, 11:40 AM
T4D , why do you not create a seperate thread, this thread is about the Renderer, not about other things you mentioned, an some of them maybe are subjective.

I will not discuss more to your points, because the thread else goes OT, and don't take it wrong please.

freakmoomin
07-21-2006, 01:06 PM
Well I'm doing some previz in LW with LW 9 this week
and well yeah the render is better and the nodes are cool but not as powerful and XSI
the modeler is Nice but the same interface problems are they,. SO modo is still much better
But Nodes and the new render stuff doesn't help me cause I uses Fprime ??

the animation set and tools haven't been touch,
the expanded OpenGL doesn't seem to have been worked or added to since LW 8.5.
after working in it fully, Not much has changed pretty slim really,. was hoping of alot of cool little things but ended up get improvments to things i don't uses or can't uses.

and still Newtek seems alittle to be lost ?
Load from scene still doesn't Load locks and selection sets ( the biggest bug LW Has ) but it got a nice load interface missing all the options it really needed.?
OpenGL Procedures Still are very limited and the speed faster for still object BUT Character deformation/IK/OpenGL is unchanged

No real IKBooster OR Standard IK updates, No graph editor, motion mixer, NO Hardbody or softbody, No animation Update at all really, Very minor updates here and there still keep LW far behide the rest...

LW 9 gives needed modeling tools Ngons and Edges but no polishing that thousand button interface,
LW 9 Layout has had Render improvments good camera options, alittle faster Nodes
These features are good But None of it works with Fprime yet...
A small item selection improvment, and some colour changing options and afew minor plugin that about all i feel i got in LW 9
( minor plugins well I got alot more off www.flay.com in the last 6 months for free then what Newtek gave me in this release. )

I said this in the LW 8.x cycle,.. but Man LW 9.5 has to be a MAJOR release or LW is dead. :sad:
I can't see LW 10 being anything when i clearly see I got more in the XSI 4.2 -> 5,0 update then what i have got from Lw from 7 -> 9

Im really interested about this, i think it would be good to start a new thread as 'schuubars' suggested. Although it seems like normal user observations to me im afraid it will be seen as LW bashing (crap).

But its good to hear some thoughts of someone who uses other packages and isnt blinded by the whole 'LW is the best' mentality'. I was/am really hoping for the best release by newtek, but being an animator im not gonna get it im afraid. But please 'T4D' post a new thread and we can get views of others positive and negative.

Cageman
07-21-2006, 03:00 PM
But its good to hear some thoughts of someone who uses other packages and isnt blinded by the whole 'LW is the best' mentality'.

Sorry man, but that statement offended me a little. Maya is the app that has payed my bills for the last couple of months, working freelance at a studio.

biliousfrog
07-21-2006, 05:41 PM
Off topic, DMack: Here's a pdf supplied by Ben Vost when we were having some rendering issues at work. It covers the use of non-compressed or "better" compressed images to save on the computing needed prior to rendering.
The basics of it are that LW needs to uncompress images before rendering them just like any other render engine, so jpg's can actually create longer rendering times & higher memory usage than a tiff for example. I now use png's almost exclusively.

I felt a bit angry when this was mentioned because it felt like I was the only person in the world that didn't know how a render engine works...there were loads of replys along the lines of "duh, everyone knows that images need to be decompressed at render time!"...well I just do as I'm told & if Newtek left that section out of the manual & I've never read about it in a book or magazine then I'll just use jpg's like I've always been told!

Back on topic: I can see a similar thing happening with the new renderer...BSP trees and KDtrees, how obvious it is that some things are slower or faster....well it isn't to me. I don't need or want to know how the renderer works but it would be kinda nice to have some examples of when to use a certain camera or how modelling/texturing/lighting can affect render times with the new render engine. As usual it looks like Newtek have thrown out a new Lightwave version & we have to work out how it works....or is it just that no-one has read the manual yet?

Zarathustra
07-21-2006, 06:00 PM
I don't need or want to know how the renderer works but it would be kinda nice to have some examples of when to use a certain camera or how modelling/texturing/lighting can affect render times with the new render engine.

BING! That's why I'm following this thread and I'm especially pleased that it'll continue on untampered with (hopefully). Rendering isn't GLOBALLY faster, but this and that, here and here if this, this and this is in place, then..... THAT'S the stuff everyone's going to benefit from if it's broken down and becomes more formulaic instead of random stabs in the dark.

lightwolf
07-21-2006, 11:20 PM
Well, I can explain a bit of how things work, if it helps:

KD-Tree
The main point of those acceleration structures is to check as few polygons as possible for ray/polygon intersection to find the first polygon hit by a ray.
Previously LW used a bounding box method to accelerate rendering (to be more precise: raytracing -> shadows, reflections, transparencies and radiosity).
Basically a ray is fired into the scene, first there is a check to see if it intersects the bounding box of a mesh, only if that is the case does it check if it hits any polygons within that mesh.
The kd-tree takes all the polygons in a scene, and then starts slicing up the scene into little 3D boxes, each one containing some of the total polygons. These boxes are then sliced up again. The size of the boxes are chosen so that in an ideal case there is an equal amount of polygons in each of them.
When raytracing, these boxes are checked first (just like the bounding box), and if it is hit the boxes contained... until the ray can only intersect polygons (or not).

In both cases, the point is that checking for a ray/bounding box intersection is a lot faster then checking for a ray/polygon intersection.

Now imagine a single mesh with 100k polygons. The old render engine would keep those in a single bounding box, and if hit, check for the intersection against 100k polygons.
The kd-tree can take those 100k polies and add more bounding boxes, acccelerating the process.

This is why the old method could be a lot faster raytracing 100 objects @ 1K polygons vs. 1 object at 100k polygons for example (100 vs. 1 bounding box).

Either method is likely to have problems with polygons that are large compared to the rest of the scene (since a box must be big enough to fit that polygon, the box can't be sliced any further).

Classic vs. perspective camera
Two main differences:
Multithreading: Perspective camera copes a lot better with multiple threads. Initially the image is divided by the amount of threads (vertically), and each thread starts raytracing its segment. If one thread finishes early, it is assigned to the largest missing vertical segment, which is split in half, on half rendered by the original thread, the other by the thread that just finished. This allows all threads to be busy at all times during rendering. This is also why the amount of threads should now be equal to the number of CPUs/Cores.

Order of rendering: the classic camera is a hybrid Z-Buffer/raytrace renderer. Basically, polygons directly visible from the camera are rendered directly, by "painting" a shaded polygon into the final image. This is done starting with the polygon closest to the camera up until the polygon farthest away is reached (while painting, for every pixel the distance to the camera is checked, if the new polygon is closer at that pixel it is drawn, otherwise not - the distance is measured to the centre of the polygon).
The perspective camera raytraces right from the start, firing rays into the scene.

The classic camera allows you to render effects that are hard to do with a pure raytracer, including 1 and 2 point polygons and edges (which are basically 2 point polys). On the other hand, it is prone to render too much geometry at times. (Classic example: A ground plane with few polygons on which there is a detailed mesh, in some cases parts of the ground plane are rendered first, only to later be covered up by the mesh that is on top if it. This is because the centre of the ground plane polygons may be closer to the camera, and are thus "painted" first).

I hope that helps a bit... ;)

Cheers,
Mike

Edit: This is somewhat simplified, and may also not be 100% accurate as to how LW handles rendering. It should be close enough though.

pixym
07-22-2006, 02:39 AM
Michael,

NT should hire you to explain some points of their product. I am very impressed.

Best.

lightwolf
07-22-2006, 10:27 AM
NT should hire you to explain some points of their product. I am very impressed.

:bounce: Thanks :beer:

I'll check with Ben, maybe he wants to release a PDF like the one about image handling in LW that I helped him with.

Cheers,
Mike - blushing now

Cageman
07-22-2006, 10:38 AM
Well, I can explain a bit of how things work, if it helps:

Edit: This is somewhat simplified, and may also not be 100% accurate as to how LW handles rendering. It should be close enough though.

Thanks alot for the insight... based on the information you provided it's easier to understand why LW9 behaves the way it does! :thumbsup:

ThE_JacO
07-23-2006, 03:53 AM
Well, I can explain a bit of how things work, if it helps:

KD-Tree
The main point of those acceleration structures is to check as few polygons as possible for ray/polygon intersection to find the first polygon hit by a ray.

nice job, my only objection is that the description is actually a lot closer to an OCtree then it is to a KDtree.
It's not a big deal, and an OCtree is easier to explain and visualize then a KDtree is to non dev-savy people, so it was probably a good move anyway, but for those interested in some basics of the techniques avaliable:
http://www.flipcode.com/harmless/issue02.htm

A KDtree isn't just a progressive refinment space partitioning, and being axis sensitive it can be quite expensive pre-processing, but it yelds a lot of benefits in many situations.

It would be nice to hear from newtek to know if the tree is actually accessible from other parts of LW or if they limited it to the rendering engine.

A partitioned scene structure is useful for a number of things that are not rendering, and if they only do it (and maybe redo it from scratch every time) at rendering time then they're wasting a good foundation they could capitalize more on (deformers, spatial mapping, any neighborhood or path finding algorithm, spatial LUTs, dynamics/collisions/raycolliding, SDK exposure + API access to the results etc.)

There's also a need to give people some sort of control over the KDtree. I understand that to not scare the artists off one might not want to complicate things too much, but branching and population control (not talking about condoms btw :p ) are usually necessary complements to sorting algorithms, and they come for free normally, just need exposure.
It's well known and proven that iterative processing to optimize the KDtree automatically is usually ineffective, or at least doesn't allow the user to privilege CPU VS Memory footprint or viceversa.

Freak!!
07-23-2006, 05:07 AM
Back on topic: I can see a similar thing happening with the new renderer...BSP trees and KDtrees, how obvious it is that some things are slower or faster....well it isn't to me. I don't need or want to know how the renderer works but it would be kinda nice to have some examples of when to use a certain camera or how modelling/texturing/lighting can affect render times with the new render engine. As usual it looks like Newtek have thrown out a new Lightwave version & we have to work out how it works....or is it just that no-one has read the manual yet?

I think if you read through some of these posts, and mikes post as well as other forums,
you would already have a good understanding of when and where it's better to use perspective over classic. Good quality renderers don't get any easier to achieve good results, than Lightwave... LW users are spoiled at the ease of use already..

Honestly from the post above i'd wonder if 3D artist is something you want to be doing?
If you don't like trying and playing with new features/abilities and limitations in your 3D program, why are you doing 3D? For me the great thing about LW9 is there is some new tech to play with...... I've already done Nodal Fprime displacements, Nodal surfacing and realistic fog a good workout, not to mention Ngons and anything else....

By the time i wrote this message i could of tried 5 varied scenes and rendererd them in perspective and classic, with a load of varying options, resolutions, and pretty much worked out when and where the advantages are gained and lost...... Is it that hard really?

I'm quite happy to let NT implement KD-Trees into the renderer, and let me sort out for myself when and where i use either option..... It instantly seems fairly obvious to myself,
and i know nothing about the specfics of either implentation, my job as 3Der is to make the best use of those implentations.... I'm not sure what your job as a 3D artists would entail...

This is generally better than having only the one option, and LW would only have perspective if it was a new build and not a parrallel changeover methodology in place.
I would love some of the users are complaining about not knowing when to use what in LW,
would go in Mental Ray..... (shudders at thought).

There's also a need to give people some sort of control over the KDtree. I understand that to not scare the artists off one might not want to complicate things too much

Yeah with some LW users in this thread obviously adding power into the users hands should be done with caution..... I can't imagine how some LW users would go setting their own BSP size in MR.... I would suggest Poser for people not looking for more options and enhancements in the future...

ThE_JacO
07-23-2006, 05:49 AM
Yeah with some LW users in this thread obviously adding power into the users hands should be done with caution..... I can't imagine how some LW users would go setting their own BSP size in MR.... I would suggest Poser for people not looking for more options and enhancements in the future...

the thing is that simple settings and control are not, contrary to popular opinion, mutually exclusive.
as it is now you only have an automated, fairly expensive, iterative process to manage the KDtree. In the same way that you only have oversimplified control over sampling and AA procedures.

having fine tuning possibilities, and eventually a simplified superset of controls that will set them for you from a comfortable simple choice of a few presets, will work out just fine for a larger audience.

Mray already does that. If it finds your BSP settings inconvenient it will resize your leaves or try to overpopulate some to not screw up the expensive branching operations already actuated; there needen't be nothing more then what's already being done by a few other engines out there.

Freak!!
07-23-2006, 07:43 AM
the thing is that simple settings and control are not, contrary to popular opinion, mutually exclusive.
as it is now you only have an automated, fairly expensive, iterative process to manage the KDtree. In the same way that you only have oversimplified control over sampling and AA procedures.

Yes we do, Lightwolf would also agree i'm sure to wanting an AA Class in the SDK,
to add some alternatives with more control on AA.

having fine tuning possibilities, and eventually a simplified superset of controls that will set them for you from a comfortable simple choice of a few presets, will work out just fine for a larger audience.

I dunno we can't even seem to implent the KD-Tree with some complaints.. :)
Some more control and presets would likely help those users find a better balance though.

Mray already does that. If it finds your BSP settings inconvenient it will resize your leaves or try to overpopulate some to not screw up the expensive branching operations already actuated; there needen't be nothing more then what's already being done by a few other engines out there.

Yes Mental Ray is quite configurable and smart in it's approach, it's definately the most flexible approach of the mainstream 3D renderers but for newbies it can be hard to find the perfect balance between quality and speed setup quickly.

I did see quite a few complaints on Modo's renderer which is somewhere in between, in terms of user control verse quality and speed in comparison to LW or MR. It seems everyone wants a "make not suck" button, but doesn't realize their will never be ONE perfect setting that will render any or every scene at optimal conditions.

Some trial and error and some experimenting of any renderer will go a long way to getting good results. LW just needed a little bit less until recently, but options are always good.

lightwolf
07-23-2006, 02:35 PM
nice job, my only objection is that the description is actually a lot closer to an OCtree then it is to a KDtree.
It's not a big deal, and an OCtree is easier to explain and visualize then a KDtree is to non dev-savy people, so it was probably a good move anyway, but for those interested in some basics of the techniques avaliable:
Absolutely Right. I think from a practical point of view the difference is not that grand, especially compared to the old bounding box method, so excuse me for the sloppiness ;)

@Freak!!
Yes, I agree, more control is always better - at least from a developers POV ;)
Care has to be taken to balance things for the end-user, but LW seems to open up in that regard in making the rendering process more tweakable for users.

Cheers,
Mike

biliousfrog
07-24-2006, 07:57 AM
I think if you read through some of these posts, and mikes post as well as other forums,
you would already have a good understanding of when and where it's better to use perspective over classic. Good quality renderers don't get any easier to achieve good results, than Lightwave... LW users are spoiled at the ease of use already..

Honestly from the post above i'd wonder if 3D artist is something you want to be doing?
If you don't like trying and playing with new features/abilities and limitations in your 3D program, why are you doing 3D? For me the great thing about LW9 is there is some new tech to play with...... I've already done Nodal Fprime displacements, Nodal surfacing and realistic fog a good workout, not to mention Ngons and anything else....

Of course I like playing with new features but you could spend hours/days/months trying out the different cameras & still not know for sure what is making each one the better choice for a certain scene. If you're working in a production environment you don't always get time to try out every single feature of the software...that's why you get manuals! Lightwolf's description is very helpful but why isn't it in the manual along with the optimised image use?

I don't own LW9 & don't intend on getting it so I can't say for certain that it's not covered in the manual but bacause of this thread I'm guesing that it's not. I'm sure that others would like to know how some of the new features work so that they don't spend hours going down dead-ends....especially if you spend minutes playing with a new feature & then hours rendering because you haven't got the correct camera setup...an exageration I know but you get my point.

CGTalk Moderation
07-24-2006, 07:57 AM
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.