PDA

View Full Version : problem with RENDERING Hypervoxels on a render farm



scott.newman.ct
08-01-2017, 09:49 AM
I sent off a test scene to a render farm service provider,

the scene only contains an emitter object with static particles, no dynamics and a Hypervoxels volumetric applied.

When the scene renders on the render farm, only Hypervoxels in frame zero render, and then every frame after that is completely empty - nothing renders.

Any ideas on why this would be? Is it some kind of cahche or temp file that I was supposed to send with my project?

I find it weird that the first frame renders fine and then nothing after that

Thanks to anyone who can help with this

prometheus
08-01-2017, 10:00 AM
I sent off a test scene to a render farm service provider,

the scene only contains an emitter object with static particles, no dynamics and a Hypervoxels volumetric applied.

When the scene renders on the render farm, only Hypervoxels in frame zero render, and then every frame after that is completely empty - nothing renders.



Any ideas on why this would be? Is it some kind of cahche or temp file that I was supposed to send with my project?

I find it weird that the first frame renders fine and then nothing after that

Thanks to anyone who can help with this

Not experienced with render farms..but, your particle life time is ok, as being the same amount as the scene is?

mummyman
08-01-2017, 10:16 AM
Did you bake out the particle file? It needs to be cached to a .pfx

Axis3d
08-01-2017, 10:21 AM
Yes. As mummyman said, you need to save a .pfx file out. I like to make sure that the FX_Emitter > Particle > Lifetime (frame) is set to 0. Entering a '0' is the same thing as turning it off, and will allow the particles to live for the entire length of the animation.

scott.newman.ct
08-01-2017, 10:28 AM
Thanks for the information...

No I didnt bake a .pfx file - didnt know I had to.

Do you have to do this even when there are no dynamics affecting the particles?

I dont have to bake anything when I render the scene on my local machine. Is this baking something you have to do especially for network rendering?

Prometheus - particle age is set to last the entire frame count of the scene.

mummyman
08-01-2017, 10:31 AM
On a render farm... yes.. I do. Even though it looks fine in your scene on 1 machine.

scott.newman.ct
08-01-2017, 11:45 AM
OK, thanks - I'll give it a try and let you know how it turns out

mummyman
08-01-2017, 01:20 PM
Sure! Good luck!

scott.newman.ct
08-02-2017, 02:30 AM
The scene is busy rendering on the render farm as I type thiss... I just had a look at the preview and it looks like its all working correctly now. So far the HV are showing up in all frames. Woohoo!

Thanks everyone for your advice

scott.newman.ct
08-02-2017, 02:35 AM
The scene is busy rendering on the render farm as I type thiss... I just had a look at the preview and it looks like its all working correctly now. So far the HV are showing up in all frames. Woohoo!

Thanks everyone for your advice

mummyman
08-02-2017, 06:54 AM
Awesome-ness!

scott.newman.ct
08-03-2017, 03:50 AM
So heres an update... and some WEIRDNESS!

I rendered the sequence as a becnhmark on my Macbook - it took 22 hours. According to the render farm service provider's calculator - the sequence should have rendered in around 4 minutes on their supercomputer and cost 10 Euro.

In actual fact - it took 14 minutes to render and ended up costing 29 Euro. (in test credit, not actual money)

In trying solve where the discrepancy in time happened, Ive noticed that the result rendered on the render farm is visually different to what I got on my Macbook.

Here is a comparison of same frame numbers in the below images. Anyone know why they would be different? They are from the identical scene.

137558

137559

prometheus
08-03-2017, 08:31 AM
So heres an update... and some WEIRDNESS!

I rendered the sequence as a becnhmark on my Macbook - it took 22 hours. According to the render farm service provider's calculator - the sequence should have rendered in around 4 minutes on their supercomputer and cost 10 Euro.

In actual fact - it took 14 minutes to render and ended up costing 29 Euro. (in test credit, not actual money)

In trying solve where the discrepancy in time happened, Ive noticed that the result rendered on the render farm is visually different to what I got on my Macbook.

Here is a comparison of same frame numbers in the below images. Anyone know why they would be different? They are from the identical scene.

137558

137559

I wonder how that renderfarm can evaluate the rendertime? it has to take in account all frames individually, since if you do a fly over or through the clouds, the rendertimes will be much slower when doing so...so consequently the first frames faster to render.

scott.newman.ct
08-03-2017, 09:17 AM
Prometheus, I think the render calculator only works off an average frame render time - so in that sense its only as accurate as the data you give it.

But in my case - I had done the whole render on my own machine as a benchmark - so 121 frames in 22 hours gave an average of 11 minutes per frame. In reality some frames took 20 minutes to render, while others were under 10 minutes per frame.