PDA

View Full Version : Justification Minimum Requirement from Newtek.



thiyaguthree
02-18-2019, 03:33 AM
144177

Hi All

For a Decade I have been using Lightwave, for my Engineering Plant Flythru, Technical Animation. I have to deal with sometimes millions of polygon.
While handling with large engineering equipents which is difficult to pan and work in it. I am using the same machine till now Which is precision T7500 (E5520 x2 processors) 12 GB Ram. I change my workflow according to my Medium Light and Big projects. Now when its time to change all my company PC as service period is finished. I take this opportunity to upgrade my PC..but my management is referring to the machine for the minimum requirement of softwares and Hardwares Autodesk... Lightwave 3D. Here there are different departments, people need proper requirement when I claim for a better than the existing (T7500).
In what way I can make compromise and let them understand that my justification is right? How Newtek is looking at my issue to work on the minimum requirement for render and get output for big projects with two machines or Lightwave suggest only for minimum requirement modelling and animation?

JohnMarchant
02-18-2019, 04:02 AM
It is the minimum requirement to get it to work, but thats a bare minimum. Like most software the better the hardware the faster it will be. Time is money to most companies so point out the time saving of having more memory, more graphics card memory and faster processor/s. Render times and delivery dates are important and whilst minimum will work it will just take a hell of a lot longer to achieve.

raymondtrace
02-18-2019, 06:44 AM
Open up one of your more demanding scenes and get screen shots of the system resources being used. That will educate management that you're not just running a word processing program.

To demonstrate the savings of money/time John mentions, find a test scene used in these forums or at a benchmark website to compare how quickly your current system performs.

pauland
02-19-2019, 06:28 AM
The minimum requirement has no meaning when it comes to investment. What you need to show is that new investment will result in greater efficiency for your company that will itself repay that investment over time.

Essentially you need to explain that increased investment beyond the minimum has the greatest effect on rendering/creation times and will reduce the cost of generating the animations by speeding up the process and reducing lead times and offer the possibility of more complex work. None of that has any relationship to the minimum system requirement.

thiyaguthree
02-21-2019, 07:55 PM
Well. I'm going to create a document of both the hardware and software functions. Let me get back to you guys how they respond.

pauland
02-22-2019, 02:13 AM
Well. I'm going to create a document of both the hardware and software functions. Let me get back to you guys how they respond.

Asking management to interpret that kind of thing is pointless, if you have management like I have been used to. The fact that they focus on the minimum requirement is evidence of how little they understand.

What you need to demonstrate is how much more efficient and capable the company would be following an investment in better hardware. The other thing to consider is that should you wish to upgrade your software in the future, the minimum requirement may change again, so the more powerful the replacement the more likelihood that it will be viable for a longer period.

I'm really a hobbyist but others here may be able to help you with information about the hardware that they use for similar work to your own and I'm pretty sure that it won't be the minimum spec.

Management likes diagrams so showing the relative capability of some options as diagrams/charts will be better than plain numbers.

JohnMarchant
02-22-2019, 03:24 AM
Well i have to agree with Pauland, you need to make them see it, explaining it is not likely to cut it. Give them some expamples of render times and futureproofing.