1_01_09_0023

Dynamics for Rabbit's ear and tail needed to be baked.
Hair Jitter was set to 100% which allowed the Density to be turned way down.
DOF was on.
Render time was 38 minutes.

2_07_079_0066

Hair Jitter on the beard was set for 100%, and on the eyebrows and mustache Jitter was set to 50% which allowed the Density to be lowered.
DOF was on.
Render time was 50 minutes.

between 30-35 minutes per frame

I have no idea if DOF, jitter was set - I used the camera settings - EXCEPT alpha buffer was set to ON - I turned it off - hope that was correct?

EDIT: DOF is off

oct 16 - 23 (out of 153) 30-35 min/frame
oct 17 - 17 (40 out of 153) 40-45 min/frame
oct 18 - 17 (57 out of 153) ave 42 min/frame
oct 19 - 15 (72 out of 153) ave 42 min/frame

I have 1_01_04_0000.tga - 1_01_04_0048.tga

Unfortunately, This forum won't let me upload a tga file (Upload failed. You are not permitted to upload this type of file)
Here's the jpeg...

Click to view attachment

The first 24 frames averaged almost 40 minutes which means this might take me a few nights.
I just rendered with the camera setting. Just hope that it is set right
I did want to see how it looked so I put it together and noticed a problem, a flicker in the background caused by a couple trees that render but, only in some frames.
Let me know if I should try to re-render the faulting Targas or if I need to change a setting or what.
Thanks.

Click to view attachment

I have 3 computers eating through 1_01_02 with rendertimes between 15-40min each

Click to view attachment

Nancy, those trees are a pain in the butt. I thought I fixed them. They are cookiecut trees that have a image sequence on them. I thought /i got them to freeze on one of the images, but I guess not.

Did someone change the lighting?

Hmmm...I hadn't noticed - but Yes there is a tiny flicker on the trees in the distance in the mov that I posted (as well as Toby's).

I'm a bit worried about this scene. I have rendered one scene fine, in this one (01-01-19) I took the camera settings as they were, and this is happening:

Screen Grab Pass 1 OK
Click to view attachment

Screen Grab Pass 2 Iffy
Click to view attachment

Pass 3 is much the same as Pass 2, except for everything has shifted a bit

Final image from previous frame
Click to view attachment

Is it possible that there is a setting wrong? (Which one?)

Depth of Field.

Or if the camera is moving, it could be motion blur and supposed to be like that.

That's the trouble with studying 1/24th of a second in time, and being over-excited about how the movie looks.

I think it's motion blur from the camera (along with the depth of field), so I'll just let it run.

I would stop rendering this sequence, there is a lighting problem.

The light rig is corrupt, it needs to be reverted to the previous revision.


EDIT: The file isn't corrupt, the shortcut is. The light rig was renamed "Sky", the rig has a light called Sky, renaming the instance in the chor corrupt the Sky intensity pose (the pose is now referencing the model bone instead).

This caused more problem then I thought, but it's all fixed, I think. Please update the shared data folder to update the light rig before rendering.

And rerender? in my case 1_01_02?

Frames Rendered 42
Frames Left 53
Average Time 0:13:11
720 x 405 Final
Multi Pass, 5 Pass
Shadows
Reflections, Levels = 1
Motion Blur 50%
Depth of field

Hope to finish this one this evening,
Chris

I'm talking to Mark about the situation. Let's finish up 1_01 completely first - we'll come back to it later if need be.

Every scene in Sequence 1_01 is out for rendering! (Sequence 2_10 next.)

Hopefully we are learning early from our mistakes...

What version of AM are we suppossed to be rendering in. I didn't realize one of my computers had 14.0a and the other 14.0b.
When I put all my renders together, I noticed they each rendered the (edit) duck a little different.

Click to view attachment

(I couldn't do anything about the blinking trees - I don't know what is causing that)

Please correct me if I am wrong, or if this issue was rectified, but I am pretty sure that David Dustin did some tests rendering from different processors and found that they produced different results. This may have been a netrender issue though.

what i have done now.

01_01_21 rendering
Click to view attachment

01_01_23 Done
Click to view attachment

01_01_24 Rendering
Click to view attachment

my contribution so far: 1_01_06 and 1_01_26 (both scenes took about 5min per frame)

5 mins Steve!? Is that on the render farm?

no, those are on my home machines, in A:M, at night
(The "farm" is currently working on 2_07, then 2_08- just finished 2_03)

It appears mine crashed after 12 (of 95) frames. Is there an easy way to restart it without doing the 12 frames again?

change the start frame in the render range properties eg if the render originally was set up for 0 thru n , make it go from 13 to n

Change the frame range on the Camera (but don't save the chor it like that). Do you know how to crack open the Properties of the camera and change the Range Start?

Nope, don't know how to do that. What's the difference between using the camera and using the output render options?

You can use the Render Options as long as they're set "From Camera."

Am I the only one having problems? I just got home and attached is what I found. I have 1GB of ram, even though the processes didn't say they were using 1.8GB of RAM (AM was like 230MB and the ~process was like 300K or something), the comp was in a paging fit and the CPU was pretty much idle while my drive was getting the crap kicked out of it. The fact that I'm a newbie doesn't help, I'm sure. But this is frustrating.

My guess is that it's going to take 2 gigs of RAM to render.

Although it looks like it may be that one frame that has a problem? The others seem to be rendering fast.

You could try aborting the render, restarting the computer, and re-rendering starting from that frame.

Last frame in 1_01_14 - the render times varied from 12 mins to 50 mins, depending on the contents of the shot,

Has anyone else experienced problems with senduit?

I tried uploading last night, and again this morning, it goes so far in the process, but never seems to produce a link to the file. I dont seem to be doing anything wrong in the process, the zip file size is 66.5 mb (.rar files are 54.1 but that isn't uploading either)

Now rendering 1_01_30b
Chris

I see the depth-of-field but where is the motion blur on that image? Are you using V14b, and is motion blur set to 50%?

Mmmmmmm

All the rendering was done using 14a
The motion blur was set to 50%

All the other frames seem to have motion blur, except this one.The rendering was finished some time in the evening, so I didn't interupt it. I am just going to re-render this frame and check if its the same.

This is 93 in the sequence

A re-render of the final frame looks the same. Motion Blur was definately ON

Must have something to do with being the last frame? (I'm not going to mention that the cow is flying - that's not your problem.)

Huh? They don't look the same at all (at least the ones you posted). The first (rendered in a sequence) is obviously blurrier than the 2nd rendered by itself.

Looks to me that there will be inconsistencies by stopping chor rendering mid sequence. I am having to do this as the chor I have isn't gonna finish in 1 night (try more like 6 more nights).

EDIT: I'm probably mistaken - perhaps I am looking at 2 different frames? The last and next to last?

scenes 1_01_12, 27 and 29 5-10 minutes per frame

OK Mr Steve - Just what are you feeding your computer for breakfast? - I want it.

What is your system's config?

My scenes don't have DOF set - does DOF have any impact on render times?

live small furry animals and an occasional human child...

DOF and motion blur should have almost no impact on render times-

Oh, my system specs:
one is a Athlon64 4600 OC'ed to 2.6 GHZ, the other is a Intel Core2 Duo 6400 OC'ed to 3.4GHZ, 2GB performance RAM, and a RAID
*warning* I do not suggest or endorse overclocking I really think it's the fresh live food, not the overclocking that improves render speed-

Steve, did you update your local copy of the shared data folder? The light rig needs to be updated. It still looks as though there is a lighting problem.

Also, I don't think I like the DOF, the background sets look like pixeled painting.

Yes, sorry,that was the next and next to last. When I said the tre-render looks the same, I meant it looks the same as the frame posted, and this one - the second posted- shows the same thing

\o/ Added another 512MB of RAM and am happily back to rendering! Looks like 1.5GB is the minimum for this one. Being that I only have 13 frames rendered so far, should I just start over from the beginning (about 13min per frame) or start from where I left off?

Start from where you left off.

Sorry people I have not been sharing but I am now on my thrid scene the first 2 went by without any problems that I am aware of and the render time was impresive time. But After boosting to Martin about how well it was goig I think he was smiling when you asked me to render 1_01_30 Man I think this is going to work my system to death I am getting 1 hour and 47minutes per frame and after 24 hours I have 13 frames and this is a 6 secound shot and Am says I have 264 hours left of rendering to go!

So here is scenes 1_01_13 1_01_15 and still working on 1_01_30

It appears that 14.0a and 14.0b render a little different so make sure you are using 14.0b.
I was asked to re-render everything in 14.0b
It fixed the coloring of the goose but unfortunately the flickering trees are still there.

So here are the first 48 frames put together.

Click to view attachment

I was also asked to render to frame 60. I set the last 12 frames to render overnight but this morning I found I got the dreaded exception #010 on the first frame. I'll try again tonight.

Ok I stopped my rendering to work on my assignments and AM showed I had 13 frames rendered when I looked at the dir I am rendering too I have 13 tga from 0 to 12 so 0 is the 1st and 12 is the 13th if I understand this right. Now I went to start it rendering again and I starting rendering 13 to n which is wrong I should have put down 12 to n so now I have 0 to 12 and now 14 to 18 so I am missing 13 I changed the file name to 1_01_0013 when I started the render for the 2nd time because when I went to do it without changing it AM asked if I wanted to ovewrite frame 0000. So can I mesh up the frame # by doing this? is what I have 14 really 14 can I just render 13 by itself and it will be write in the end?

Yeah, I didn't want to risk getting confused, so I created a document to keep track.. I just did this:

4:04 = 100
4:05 = 101
4:06 = 102
4:07 = 103
4:08 = 104
4:09 = 105
4:10 = 106
4:11 = 107
4:12 = 108
4:13 = 109
4:14 = 110
4:15 = 111
4:16 = 112
4:17 = 113
4:18 = 114
4:19 = 115
4:20 = 116
4:21 = 117
4:22 = 118
4:23 = 119
5:00 = 120
5:01 = 121
5:02 = 122

So I don't have to worry about remembering after a crash.