Large Image

[Zacchia]

Today i tried to render a larger image: 6000 x 3000. I like to make a quicktime movie with it. I tried 2 times with low+ but after raytracing the antialiasing did not start. It was written something like: raytracing (3 treads) 0% and then i guess the rendering did not go on. Then i tried the same with 4000 x 2000 and it was working fine. Can this be because of the imagesize? I have 4 treads and because of this i was wondering about reading 3 treads. On irridiance catching/raytracing i could read 4 treads. Hope anybody understand what i mean

[Frederik]

Fully understand what you're trying to say...
What you've experienced have nothing to do with cores (threads), CPU speed or alike... This is a memory (RAM) issue...
You haven't mentioned how much RAM your computer have, but regardless of that, you'll need to remember that SU is a 32-bit application and so is Twilight and because of this, you can't utilize more than app. 4Mb RAM...

If I were you, I would render in a lower resolution and then - if it's really needed - I would resize all rendered images in a post pro and then make the movie...

But why do you need to render in such a high resolution...??

“A Bug’s Life” was created using a 2.35:1 widescreen aspect ratio, which resulted in individual frames that were rendered out at 2048x862 pixels. This is a surprisingly low resolution, considering the image will be projected on an over 30 feet large screen. “Two things help.” Craig explains. “Once we did some measurements on the resolution of 35 mm film prints and more interestingly, the actual resolution you get when you project this 35 mm print to a screen. If you high end use lab equipment you can get about 2000 lines out of this print, but even in a good movie theater only 850-900 lines are visible. On ‘Young Sherlock Holmes’ we computed the glass-window knight at 1024x600 pixels or so, and they even had to diffuse it in Optical to make it soft and match the film.”

“You have to know how RenderMan works to understand why we get away with such a low resolution. It anti-aliases the image using multiple samples per pixel. Other renderers render in hi-resolution and then apply anti-aliasing as a post procedure. When we have a 2048 pixel frame, it compares to what other people have in 8192 pixels, but it doesn’t take nearly as much processing time and space.”
“We did film test at different resolutions, including these higher than 2048 pixel frames and everyone said, why should we bother? You couldn’t see the difference. Even a 1024 dpl projector looks as good as it does. If you go to a normal theaters you do really well if you see 1000 lines, which is kind of disappointing, actually.”

I found the interview:
http://www.dvdreview.com/html/dvd_revie ... view.shtml

[Zacchia]

Thanks Frederik. Your answer is a lot to read and i use Pano2QTVR to create the mov. movie and i have read that best size should be about 5 times larger then the movie size. Now i tried with about 3 time larger and so it works, also in TWL no error. See the result. So for me it is fine but i know that it is allways some kind of primitiv my work. But this one was just rendered with preview just to see if it works. Results with Low+ are fine.

[Fletch]

Thanks, Zacchia, great link!... well, this is...
Pano2VR

Pano2VR supports cylindrical, equirectangular, cube faces, cross, T, strip and QuickTime VR as input formats with the added ability to convert between these formats for retouching the cube faces. Supported file formats are JPEG, PNG, TIFF (8, 16 or 32 bits per channel), OpenEXR, Radiance HDR, and QuickTime VR files encoded with JPEG.

Looks like you can render from Twilight with Cylindrical projection camera, and open it with Pano2VR or Pano2qtvr... no need for rendering 6 different cameras!
Or if you render with Spherical Camera from Twilight, you can convert it to T or cross with other free software out there... I believe HDRShop is one.

[Zacchia]

Fletch??
I rendered this image in the mov movie in TWL with sperical camera (just 1 image) and opened in Pano2qtrv. What link you mean?

[Fletch]

I misunderstood your previous post. now I understand, thanks. (ignore my post.)

[Zacchia]

I misunderstood your previous post. now I understand, thanks. (ignore my post.)

...thats because of my terrible englisch...