jason1025

Interesting. I have always turned it on because I thought it helped with aliasing. I will have to do some tests. I remember viewing a thread that outlined which render options gave no additional render hit once other options were turned on. Can someone help me find that thread?

OK Thanks but what does soften on do under multipass? Anyone know?

I simply dont truly now what these do. I have never seen a comparison with a control Ca someone create an illustration showing the difference in these settings? Not the difference from each other but the difference in values from within themselves. I cant find anything on either of these. If the comparison illustration could be in this fashion or something like this that would be great

ZT sysstem For $579.00 before tax and shipping. AMD 2 X4 3.0GHZ 945 Proc AM Bench Test Scored an unimpressive 9:20 Ok for the price its not that bad of a score but I was expecting an 8 second time or lower. I paid Almost $650 for my HP 2.8GHZ AMD 2 X4 2.8GHZ Machine I think it took about 11 seconds or so for the test so like I said for the price it seems to be fine. If you want to paid double the price go with Intell and get about a 35% speed increase.

ZT sysstem For $579.00 before tax and shipping. AMD Atholan 2 X4 3.0GHZ 945 Proc AM Bench Test Scored an unimpressive 9:20 Ok for the price its not that bad of a score but I was expecting an 8 second time or lower. I paid Almost $650 for my HP 2.8GHZ AMD 2 X4 2.8GHZ Machine I think it took about 11 seconds or so for the test so like I said for the price it seems to be fine. If you want to paid double the price go with Intell and get about a 35% speed increase.

Dont get me wrong I like AM but the other main stream packages allow for modeling with splines too. I think one of the benefits to AM is that you dont have the polygonal edges when you render. However that really isn't an issues for the other packages anymore as computers have gotten faster. I have been learning another mainstream package and am pleased to say that Problems I thought were limited to AM plague the other packages as well. In my opinion one of AM's biggest strengths is its ease of use. Although CG in my opinion is not for the faint of heart AM is easier as compared.

Robert you are the best. I would like to purchase something small for you off your registry. Can you tell me what you would like or should I surprise you. Could you just add how the ease works in conjunction with what you have already explained?

Yes but can you give details or a tutorial on how to make that work?

Can someone point me in the right direction on this subject or create a quick video tutorial which explains how to do it?

What a pro

Here is the link to the system I purchased but I have not tested it yet. It has not arrived. The results I posted above were from other users with comparable hardware. You may want to wait a few weeks until I get and test mine. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...1-023-_-Product Below is a link to a slightly faster proc, But I think the sweet spot is the system above for bang for your buck http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...1-028-_-Product This system comes with two more gigs of ram but I still think the first link is the best buy http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16883241024

I got cold feet and haven't built something yet. Let me know how it does that sounds like a good price although the general sense I get is that intel processors are way out ahead of AMD now. True. I'm just wondering what a 1-ray light is doing that z-buffered lights couldn't do. And 10 of them! I could not get the same effect with all kleigs. I heard that AM works better with AMD? Either way Your bench test is the proof in the pudding. Here are some results from other users. Apples to orange test 3.4 GHZ AMD 955 4 core proc 7:56 VS 3.33 GHZ Intel I7 975 4 core proc 6:38 The winner Intell by 1:18 The comparable AMD Proc was 16.4% slower than Intel. The winner in Bang for your buck AMD $147 VS $565 AMD May be 16.4% slower than intel but its about 74% Less expensive. I got my figures via Google products.

Thanks folks What is the best way to get you the source material? Theres about 30MB of Textures and stuff So I will give you an ftp link.. I tried the consolidate thing but I dont understand where it puts the actual project or whats exactly happening. May someone could explain.

I'm going to say that's the problem. YOu have to do what you have to do to get the look right?

Hey Robert Did you ever build your super fast System? I just ordered another system. I found a system called ZT systems. It cost $579.00 And comes with and AMD X4 945 3.0GHZ quad processor. 4G ram DDR 800MHZ, and a decent graphics card. I am curious how it will perform your bench test. I am just using it purely to render. So I hope the low amount of ram is not an issue. I am thinking this system is perfect for me because its got a tiger under the hood in terms of Processors but everything else is kind of bare.

4 Kleig, Z buffered. Approximately 10 Ray traced set to 1 ray.

I need some help rendering out a high res 1920x1080 scene. The good news is you can have the models I created for the scene as it is for my demo reel. The bad news is depending on how fast your system is it could take 9-15 hours to render one frame. I have about 30 cores rendering 30 instances but its still going to take me 9 days or so to finish. I don't recommend you volunteer unless your system renders Roberts AM Benchtest in less than 12 minutes or so. Any one who renders me 2 frames or more will get a DVD full of AM training Videos in addition to the models in the scene. Attached is about 95% of the scene rendered @ 720x405. to give you an idea. I wanted to use AM's motion blur at about 30% but it adds days to the render. I will have to do DOF and Motion blur in Post. I was thinking of using Real smart motion blur unless some one has a better idea. test_163_.mov

Hi Steve. Thanks for that info. It makes me want to purchase NR but for $500.00 Its just too steep. But For Multicore support I would pay it. FYi Jason Told me NR users must request updates before he will compile them. So If you want 15.J+ request it.

I dont think anything will come of this. Thanks though. Net render is obsolete in my opinion. I would purchase it for there price if it could do multiple cores but until then Its worth about 100 not $500

multiple instances. I realize this is not as convenient as if Netrender transparently handled multiple cores. I just see it as a shortcut to setting up multiple instance renders. Can you make a feature request? It may have more impact coming from you.

Is this for net render or for cd version with multiple instances?

Unfortunately I dont fit either of those scenarios. I have 6 computers that have a combined 30cores. Sounds like Net render needs to be updated. I know they wont because its not economical but at my last staff job we had a Net render that looked exactly like Hashes, it worked the same way. It easily took advantage of all cores as if each core was its own computer. We gave it access to two 8 core machines. It was proprietary software that that could plug into almost any render er. In our case our net render was utilizing Red's trans coding software. I think it was called Red alert. Its only job was to transcode Red Raw 4k Video footage and turn it into a Targa sequences. Its spooky when I see the gui of net render because it looks just like ours. There must be some sort of universal component there.

thanks

I was thinking of purchasing Net Render. I had a bunch of questions about the product and Jason S said that aside from open MP support it cant use multiple procs/cores. This got me thinking, Does open MP work. After testing the answer is no or at least it didn't work for me in regards to decreasing render times. You can see the results below. Can some one concur?

Thank you, great job