Messages

1

Hardware / Re: Threadripper Builds

« on: 2019-11-10, 18:27:53 »

Are you talking about GI precomp or overall performance while comparing to i9 ?  You probably know it but animation UHD cache takes longer to calculate compared to normal "still image" cache. Maybe you was using normal uhd cache on i9 and comparing it to animation cache ?

I just tested some of my scenes and indeed, while precomputing GI, cpu utilization is around 41-46%.

EDIT : on Intel machine, 100% while precomputing GI. Weird.

Ah, yes that's exactly it. I did a side-by-side comparison purely for animation GI calcs - set to calculate and save to file, and the i9 utilizes 100% and the Threadripper is exactly the same as you got. Interestingly again, if I do set the memory frequency to 2933 in the bios, utilization increases to a little over 55%.

Once onto the actual rendering though, the Threadripper is a constant 100% and gives very impressive performance.

-- Juraj, I've never noticed GI utilization before either, however now that I am calculating GI cache exclusively for a large number of scenes, I noticed it for the first time.

2

Hardware / Re: Threadripper Builds

« on: 2019-11-09, 06:25:20 »

Hello guys,

I have a CPU utilization problem! Threadripper build specs as follows:

X399 AORUS XTREME TR4
Threadripper 2990WX
GeForce  2080 Ti
128GB Kit (8 x 16GB) HyperX Predator DDR4 3000MHz, CL15
PRIME Ultra Gold, 80 PLUS 1000W PSU
Dark Rock Pro TR4 CPU Cooler

The system is running very well, temperatures are good, but I recently noticed slower than expected performance when calculating GI for several animation sequences. I tested this against my i97980XE system which was indeed much faster. I then noticed that the 2990WX system was only utilizing between 38-40% of the CPU during the pre-calc GI phase whilst my i9 was utilizing 100%. Virtulization is enabled on both, for what that is worth.

The RAM in the 2990WX is set to 3000mhz in the bios. I've tried setting it to 2933 and some of the different built in profiles but there is no change. I'm running the latest Corona 5 with 3ds Max 2018.

Here is strange thing: once the GI has been calculated and the rendering begins, CPU utilization jumps right up to 100% and stays there. This must be a clue..?

Does anyone know what this could be? As it stands, this system (purchased specifically for rendering animations) is currently slower than my older i9. I'm in a bit of a bind here with a large deadline looming.

Thanks so much for any help!

3

Jobs / Furniture Modelling + Texturing

« on: 2019-09-20, 23:33:19 »

Hello fellow artists!

We have a project happening right now that involves furniture modelling and texturing.

The job will involve:

- Modelling and texturing 15 pieces of furniture
- Sending us the rendered models (we don't require actual renderings)
- We can provide manufacturer's links and photos

The deadline for the job is Thursday 26th September, and we will need a draft of every piece by Tuesday 24th.

Please email douglas@majorvisual.com if interested. Will pay appropriately.

4

[Max] I need help! / Re: Texture mapping jagged 'seams'

« on: 2019-08-31, 05:17:25 »

Romullus - Thank you very much for this - I think I get it now. Yes, unwrapping is not really an option here. The Triplanar mapping looks to be good though; I'd never really appreciated how powerful that feature is!

I guess this was pretty obvious to you ... clearly not to me, ha ha!

Thank you again.

5

[Max] I need help! / Texture mapping jagged 'seams'

« on: 2019-08-30, 07:35:11 »

Hello all,

I'm coming across a problem that I've encountered before, and I've always managed to fudge a way around it. However, I do not want to do that anymore, and want to do things the right way.

I have a mesh given to me by a client (comes from a 3D scan of a physical object) and I need to map a texture onto it. Simple in theory. I have it in Max, with a Corona mat applied. The texture is actually a checkerboard requiring (or so I thought) nothing more than a simple UVW box map. But when I do this, these strange jagged seams appear in certain places on the mesh.

I've tried making it a poly, removing all the smoothing groups, removing all the poly IDs, reducing the mesh density, increasing the mesh density and so on. There must be a fundamental basic step that I am missing surely?

Please; if anyone can shed some light on this I'd be very grateful!

Screenshot attached with red highlight.

Thanks guys,

Douglas

6

Jobs / Freelance Work - immediate start - short deadline

« on: 2019-08-29, 04:55:11 »

Hello artists!

We are looking for a visualiser (ideally 3ds Max + Corona) with excellent Photoshop skills, understanding of how to place people and entourage to really tell a story and convey a sense of atmosphere, not merely to fill a space with bodies.

This is for a week-long project with immediate start. Deadline is understandably tight, so will pay appropriately.

We are based in Los Angeles - ideally you are close, but can be worldwide provided we can communicate regularly and easily.

We are expanding - this will almost certainly lead to more work. Please message on here, or email:

douglas@majorvisual.com

Thank you,

Douglas

7

Hardware / Re: Large-screen Tablet Device for Presentations

« on: 2018-10-17, 16:01:12 »

I got you fam: https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/15/17352624/microsoft-surface-hub-2-features-launch-date-pricing

Jokes, I don't really have a proper solution. Interested to find out as I often have the same issue with presentations.

Ha yes, I saw this during my research. It looks pretty fantastic - pretty pricey too. Would be great to test out...not so portable though.

Thing is, there were loads of large 20"+ screen tablets knocking around a few years ago, but they've all vanished now.

8

[Max] Resolved Bugs / Re: 3ds Max crashing on denoise

« on: 2018-10-17, 15:58:44 »

Displacement needs some RAM, and denoising needs some RAM. If both need too much RAM, it will blow up, which most likely happened in this case.
Moving to resolved, but feel free to bump it if there are some other problems.

Thanks Maru! In the end I upgraded the RAM which helped somewhat. My scene wasn't set-up to use displacement efficiently. Lessons for next time!

D.

9

[Max] I need help! / Re: Massive 90k pixel rendering size

« on: 2018-10-17, 15:57:30 »

hm, it still shouldnt be possible to have more than 65k bitmap in 3dsmax, even in theory with infinite RAM... I have to actually try it one day :D

Ondra, do you mean it shouldn't be possible to render anything larger than 65k px? I hit RAM limitations way before that, which necessitated the 10k px tiles.

D.

10

Hardware / Large-screen Tablet Device for Presentations

« on: 2018-10-16, 23:55:27 »

Hello all,

A few years ago the market was flooded with these portable large-screen all-in-one / tablet PC devices, however at the moment the offerings seem surprisingly slim. I am hoping to get hold of a large, 20"+ tablet type device that I can take to meetings and presentations. So many times I have to present imagery on clients' terrible resolution conference room screens which are ten years out of date and do not do any imagery any justice!

The Ipad Pro is lovely, but I was hoping for something larger. Ditto the Surface Pro. Any ideas? It would be great if it ran Windows, but not a deal breaker.

Thanks in advance guys!

Douglas.

11

Gallery / Re: Hotel in Budapest

« on: 2018-09-07, 18:58:00 »

Bravo! A fantastic set!

May I ask how you lit the scene?

D.

12

[Max] I need help! / Re: Massive 90k pixel rendering size

« on: 2018-09-07, 18:30:15 »

I gave them a flattened .PSB  (had to be PSB not PSD) file which was 17GB and also split the final it into nine .TIFF tiles for their graphic designer to reassemble - each 800MB each.

They were happy in the end! It's going to be hung high on the outside of a showroom building apparently, so nobody will ever inspect it up close! But the guys hanging it up there will be impressed by the pixel clarity, no doubt.

13

[Max] I need help! / Re: Massive 90k pixel rendering size

« on: 2018-09-07, 17:57:55 »

Well, to report back on this:

In the end I split the image into tiles and rendered each at 10,000 px long using Max's blowup function, combined them in PS and upscaled the whole thing to the ridiculous 90k. I tried upscaling in AI Gigapixel (which is brilliant for quality by the way) and also Photozoom, but they both could not deal with the vast original file size for some reason. So I used PS's upscaling algorithms and it all looked rather fine in the end. Although even opening and working with the 90k px file was pushing it for my machine. Even with an upgraded 128GB RAM!

D.

14

[Max] Resolved Bugs / Re: 3ds Max crashing on denoise

« on: 2018-09-07, 17:53:57 »

Thank you Dung & Maru!

The scene does have a huge amount of displacement going on - admittedly not an efficient use of it - and I know that this is a significant draw on RAM, which could perhaps be something to do with it. Although I do not know how this effects the denoising phase. In the end, I rendered the scene with the denoise set to gather for later, and did it in the Corona Image Editor (I didn't actually have to denoise much at all in the end).

I'll try to upload a portion of the scene if it happens again.

- D

15

[Max] I need help! / Re: Massive 90k pixel rendering size

« on: 2018-08-19, 20:18:00 »

Well thanks for the tips guys! I’ve disabled all but the most necessary render elements and also purged the scene down to the main components required for this specific view.

I do agree about the unecessary desire for a high dpi when it is not needed at this scale, and I think I’ll render lower res and upscale. Lolec - that Gigapixel software looks very interesting and I’ll try it out. Thanks!

Also agreed that these client demands are an opportunity to charge accordingly - it can be a win / win.

I’ll report back on how this goes next week.