Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19

Thread: Lightwave too slow?

  1. #1
    Registered User AmigaNewTek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Rome
    Posts
    473

    Lightwave too slow?

    Trying to create a snow storm, but i have some difficulties with particles rendering.

    First, particles are too little compared to the scene. If i want to put many particles and make them visible in the scene, i have to increase their size. Rendering, calculations, drawing operations are too slow. I noticed that calculations and geometry visualizations are really too slow. Multicore in calculation in not suppported and GPU is not used. As soon as the scene become complex, all lightwave becomes slow. Interface seems to be slow as well. What can i do to accelerate all drawing, calculations and rendering operation?

  2. #2
    Animator/Compositor wibly wobly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    267
    is it mainly the rendering speed you're having issues with or is it the sheer amount of particles you have in the shot? if it's rendering really slow, are you using hypervoxels or the new pixie dust? you can always run to AE if you need snow. there's a somewhat cheesy snow generator that comes with AE that might do what you need and it's a lot faster then 3Ding it.

    I wish they're enable multi core calculations for dynamics as well. it would really speed things up but, with core and bullet physics coming around at some point, I don't know if it's worth it now.

  3. #3
    Registered User AmigaNewTek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Rome
    Posts
    473
    Quote Originally Posted by wibly wobly View Post
    is it mainly the rendering speed you're having issues with or is it the sheer amount of particles you have in the shot? if it's rendering really slow, are you using hypervoxels or the new pixie dust? you can always run to AE if you need snow. there's a somewhat cheesy snow generator that comes with AE that might do what you need and it's a lot faster then 3Ding it.

    I wish they're enable multi core calculations for dynamics as well. it would really speed things up but, with core and bullet physics coming around at some point, I don't know if it's worth it now.
    Rendering is slow when you use Hypervoxel, particle bur, motion blur, and other things. Dunno know what pixie dust is. It's time to get hw acceleration on the entire Lightwave pipeline, isn't it?

  4. #4
    Don't think that LW renderer is slow compare to other, so when I'm running out of resources, I try other things: motion blur and particles blur in post, choose sprite instead of volume in hypervoxel (particularly for snow, it could really do the tric and save a lot of time)

    And excuse me, but isn't multi core dynamics computing a feature which have been integrated with 9.6 ? (Oooh damn I'm pretty sure that french cows write English better than I!)

    That's say, yes, we all are praying for the new Core to come and spread magic all over our pipeline

  5. #5
    Animator/Compositor wibly wobly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    267
    pixie dust is avail in the HV setting window. setup is similar to using HV rendering but, it's a lot faster. keep in mind that rendering something like this in 3D is probably always going to be slower then doing it in AE or equivalent due to the kind of calculations it needs to do. you have a boat load of control but, you pay for it in output speed imo.

    Quote Originally Posted by MUCUS View Post
    And excuse me, but isn't multi core dynamics computing a feature which have been integrated with 9.6 ? (Oooh damn I'm pretty sure that french cows write English better than I!)
    I've never seen it. Everytime I do any dynamics calculations, I only have one core running. It's been like that as far back as I can remember since I started using multi core / multi processor machines.

  6. #6
    Super Member dwburman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    2,880
    Actually, Pixie Dust is added via the Add Volumetrics drop down menu in the Volumetrics & Fog Effects panel.
    [mr] Dana W. Burman | http://dwburman.com
    Motion Graphics for sale at Pond5 Stock Footage
    Check out my tutorials at Liberty3d.com & my YouTube channel!

  7. #7
    Registered User AmigaNewTek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Rome
    Posts
    473
    Quote Originally Posted by MUCUS View Post
    Don't think that LW renderer is slow compare to other, so when I'm running out of resources, I try other things: motion blur and particles blur in post, choose sprite instead of volume in hypervoxel (particularly for snow, it could really do the tric and save a lot of time)

    And excuse me, but isn't multi core dynamics computing a feature which have been integrated with 9.6 ? (Oooh damn I'm pretty sure that french cows write English better than I!)

    That's say, yes, we all are praying for the new Core to come and spread magic all over our pipeline
    Used sprite, but still slow. Can't have decent result, especially if i use this settings found on the tutorial: http://www.3dluvr.com/content/article/106/2

    100000 particles make the system very slow if you add opther things or volumetrics. Calculations are done with one processor only, used @ 25-28% in my system. I would like to find the scene file of the tutorial above to see if i've done something wrong.

  8. #8
    Animator/Compositor wibly wobly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    267
    Post your scene and tell us in detail what you're trying to do.

  9. #9
    RETROGRADER prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    sweden stockholm
    Posts
    14,555
    perhaps you could try and setup several particle emitters with an offset in depth of the scene, and use less particles, maybe 50 000 on each, but only simulate one at the time, if you have maybe three or four such emitters you should render them out individually in passes and then comp them and correct in after effect or fusion.

    A small amount of animated textured environments might work to depending on skills setting it up.
    You could also mix your heavy particle amount with a very few particles with big particle sizes and some hypertextures effects, I would recomend HV sprites, or pixie dust for all this particle stuff.

    another option is to use fog with activated backdrop color, and use animated textured environment for getting more depth to the textured environment.

    and lastly..take a look at turbulence fluids, Itīs not only for fire and smoke, It could very well work great for a snowstorm, In fact I believe It would yield the most realistic snowstorm apart from shooting a real life one.

    Michael
    http://vimeo.com/user680656/videos/sortlays

  10. #10
    Super Member dwburman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    2,880
    You could make an emitter with fewer particles, calculate the snow falling and save the resulting calculation. Then clone or add more emitters in different positions, load the saved .pfx file and offset the time on each of the new emitters. That way you can have millions of particles, but you only need to calculate tens of thousands of them.
    [mr] Dana W. Burman | http://dwburman.com
    Motion Graphics for sale at Pond5 Stock Footage
    Check out my tutorials at Liberty3d.com & my YouTube channel!

  11. #11
    Super Member XswampyX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Kernow
    Posts
    2,057
    You could try making your snow emitter denser towards the camera.



    Also it seems quicker if you set up your particles with say 100 in number per frame, then calculate, then put it up to 10000 per frame.

    I don't know why...

    Attached Files Attached Files

  12. #12
    Registered User AmigaNewTek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Rome
    Posts
    473
    Quote Originally Posted by wibly wobly View Post
    Post your scene and tell us in detail what you're trying to do.
    Well, my scene is not an example of the lightwave best practices, cause i'm only a passionate spare time user. Btw, i'm trying to simulate a space ship landing on frozen planet during a violent snow storm.

  13. #13
    Registered User AmigaNewTek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Rome
    Posts
    473
    Quote Originally Posted by dwburman View Post
    You could make an emitter with fewer particles, calculate the snow falling and save the resulting calculation. Then clone or add more emitters in different positions, load the saved .pfx file and offset the time on each of the new emitters. That way you can have millions of particles, but you only need to calculate tens of thousands of them.
    Interesting. I will try your suggestions. Actually the whole scene is slow, not only the calculations. Even move or adjust geometry is very very slow. I have a quad core system with 4 gb ram and 512 MB Nvidia 8800. Geometry acceleration in Lightwave is not used, i guess. When i hit "calculate" only one processor is used @ 25-28%. I tried on different systems with same results.

  14. #14
    Registered User AmigaNewTek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Rome
    Posts
    473
    Quote Originally Posted by XswampyX View Post
    You could try making your snow emitter denser towards the camera.



    Also it seems quicker if you set up your particles with say 100 in number per frame, then calculate, then put it up to 10000 per frame.

    I don't know why...
    How can i make the particles denser toward the camera? I was thinking about something similar, but i don't know all the lightwave features. Just thinking about if the size of the scene can make all things slower. It's different to use a 10k land, 400 m land or 100k land size? In that case i have to reduce all the object proportions or what?

    Thank you all for the kind reply

  15. #15
    Animator/Compositor wibly wobly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    267
    Quote Originally Posted by AmigaNewTek View Post
    Well, my scene is not an example of the lightwave best practices, cause i'm only a passionate spare time user.
    It doesn't matter to me how good or bad you think it might be, if I can lend a hand somehow, it's all good to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by AmigaNewTek View Post
    Btw, i'm trying to simulate a space ship landing on frozen planet during a violent snow storm.
    Changing the camera's lens to get more or less depth of field in your shot might get you the effect you're looking for.

    Just a side thought, what opengl mode are you running in? Multitextures or GLSL shaders? If it's the latter, that could very well be killing your viewport speed.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •