Indigo Renderer 4.0.43 Beta Release
Re: Indigo Renderer 4.0.43 Beta Release
Hi,
It is not critical, but I found a new stuff yesterday. I use the RanchComputing renderfarm.
They use 3.8.23.
So I have to use this version on my workstation to be able to create 3.8.23 pigs files.
With the installation of 4.0.43 in an other location, the pigs files from 3.8.23 create background material and probably material with no "texture_index".
So to correct that, I had to re-intall 3.8.23 (same location of my original 3.8.23) to keep the creation of my pigs compatible.
That prove that 4.0.43 use the same parsing rules files even if you installed it at a different location.
It is not critical, but I found a new stuff yesterday. I use the RanchComputing renderfarm.
They use 3.8.23.
So I have to use this version on my workstation to be able to create 3.8.23 pigs files.
With the installation of 4.0.43 in an other location, the pigs files from 3.8.23 create background material and probably material with no "texture_index".
So to correct that, I had to re-intall 3.8.23 (same location of my original 3.8.23) to keep the creation of my pigs compatible.
That prove that 4.0.43 use the same parsing rules files even if you installed it at a different location.
- Originalplan®
- Posts: 757
- Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 8:58 pm
- 3D Software: Cinema 4D
- Contact:
Re: Indigo Renderer 4.0.43 Beta Release
The magic number. It means your IGI is corrupt/invalid.Originalplan® wrote:What number??? 3.14??
-
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 12:39 pm
- Contact:
Re: Indigo Renderer 4.0.43 Beta Release
I have an infinite ram usage issue when I enable OpenCL rendering on a rx480. (skindigo 3.8.33.1)
I was not having this issue with an older video card.
Tested a couple different skp files.
Video card drivers are up to date.
I was not having this issue with an older video card.
Tested a couple different skp files.
Video card drivers are up to date.
Re: Indigo Renderer 4.0.43 Beta Release
Hello!
Just wanted to say that there is noticeable progress on the OpenCL materials conversion/normals mapping front.
I am seeing black artifacting on hair and lashes, but it looks more reduced with each update release. Sometimes I can add a Normals map which will remove the black boxiness, other times I can't figure it out.
Can bypass it by using other render modes, but OpenCL is SO much faster, I would use it exclusively, very interested to see it advance!
Anyway, great work! Looking better each release!
You guys rock!
-Tony D
Just wanted to say that there is noticeable progress on the OpenCL materials conversion/normals mapping front.
I am seeing black artifacting on hair and lashes, but it looks more reduced with each update release. Sometimes I can add a Normals map which will remove the black boxiness, other times I can't figure it out.
Can bypass it by using other render modes, but OpenCL is SO much faster, I would use it exclusively, very interested to see it advance!
Anyway, great work! Looking better each release!
You guys rock!
-Tony D
Re: Indigo Renderer 4.0.43 Beta Release
On multi GPU, I can share my general experience with OpenCL.
I have a rig with 1 Titan X and 6 Titan Z (I use Amfeltec clusters), which equates to 13 GPU.
-My Titan X (12GB VRam) is attached at 16x PCI via motherboard, and
-each of the 12 Z-core (6GB Vram) is attached at 1x PCI via splitters.
In using 2 other Cuda render software, I can achieve a linear increase in render speed (performance % per-GPU drops slightly as more GPU are used), however speed is overall increased.
In case of Indigo OpenCL, here is pattern I find- I have tested a found similar pattern on the 2 test files as well as my own.
For argument sake, lets say I can render 'Scene X' w/Titan X by itself @ 14.000 M samples/sec.
If I deselect Titan X and activate:
2 of Titan Z cores (=1 Titan Z card), I will almost match @12 M samples/sec
3 of Titan Z cores (=1.5 Z card), will get @18 M samples/sec and beat the Titan X
4 of Titan Z cores (=2 Z cards), will give me @20 M samples/sec and is the 'sweet spot', fastest render time
5 of Titan Z cores (=2.5 Z card), will get 18 M samples/sec, only matching 3 Titan Z cores
6 of Titan Z cores (=3 Z cards), will give me 9 M samples/sec, less than the single Titan X
7-12 of Titan Z cores, will give me progressively lower scores, respectively, < 9 M samples/sec
(BTW 11-12 GPU crashes Indigo, sometimes...more unstable.)
(This was just an example, ~20 Ms/sec is by no means top time I saw yet. I have one less complicated scene which gets 90 Ms/sec with the 4Z sweet-spot, whereas X alone got me ~65 Ms/sec.)
As such, there is a 'diminishing return' effect after 4 GPU cores in my case, for OpenCL.
Also find that Titan X with 12GB Vram opens and closes scene on OpenCL faster that the 6GB Vram Titan Z, so the "frame completion time" when rendering a sequence of frames is sometimes faster (this depends too on resolution, desired samples, etc.). For example, I had a situation where a frame would render from start to finish with 4Z cores in 39 seconds, whereas the Titan X did each frame in 29 seconds, even though the 4Zs had the faster "render time". Possibly, the greater # kernels/lower Vram possibly contributed to a slower per-frame .igs open and close. In any event, the Titan X "frame completion time" was faster by 10 seconds. 10 seconds x 8000 frames would be about 24 hour difference in absolute render time.
Just wanted to share and am interested to hear if development may later yield a more linear achievable speed with added GPU, such that more GPU does not at a point negatively congest the flow.
Regards!
-Tony D
I have a rig with 1 Titan X and 6 Titan Z (I use Amfeltec clusters), which equates to 13 GPU.
-My Titan X (12GB VRam) is attached at 16x PCI via motherboard, and
-each of the 12 Z-core (6GB Vram) is attached at 1x PCI via splitters.
In using 2 other Cuda render software, I can achieve a linear increase in render speed (performance % per-GPU drops slightly as more GPU are used), however speed is overall increased.
In case of Indigo OpenCL, here is pattern I find- I have tested a found similar pattern on the 2 test files as well as my own.
For argument sake, lets say I can render 'Scene X' w/Titan X by itself @ 14.000 M samples/sec.
If I deselect Titan X and activate:
2 of Titan Z cores (=1 Titan Z card), I will almost match @12 M samples/sec
3 of Titan Z cores (=1.5 Z card), will get @18 M samples/sec and beat the Titan X
4 of Titan Z cores (=2 Z cards), will give me @20 M samples/sec and is the 'sweet spot', fastest render time
5 of Titan Z cores (=2.5 Z card), will get 18 M samples/sec, only matching 3 Titan Z cores
6 of Titan Z cores (=3 Z cards), will give me 9 M samples/sec, less than the single Titan X
7-12 of Titan Z cores, will give me progressively lower scores, respectively, < 9 M samples/sec
(BTW 11-12 GPU crashes Indigo, sometimes...more unstable.)
(This was just an example, ~20 Ms/sec is by no means top time I saw yet. I have one less complicated scene which gets 90 Ms/sec with the 4Z sweet-spot, whereas X alone got me ~65 Ms/sec.)
As such, there is a 'diminishing return' effect after 4 GPU cores in my case, for OpenCL.
Also find that Titan X with 12GB Vram opens and closes scene on OpenCL faster that the 6GB Vram Titan Z, so the "frame completion time" when rendering a sequence of frames is sometimes faster (this depends too on resolution, desired samples, etc.). For example, I had a situation where a frame would render from start to finish with 4Z cores in 39 seconds, whereas the Titan X did each frame in 29 seconds, even though the 4Zs had the faster "render time". Possibly, the greater # kernels/lower Vram possibly contributed to a slower per-frame .igs open and close. In any event, the Titan X "frame completion time" was faster by 10 seconds. 10 seconds x 8000 frames would be about 24 hour difference in absolute render time.
Just wanted to share and am interested to hear if development may later yield a more linear achievable speed with added GPU, such that more GPU does not at a point negatively congest the flow.
Regards!
-Tony D
Re: Indigo Renderer 4.0.43 Beta Release
There's an issue with the if statement.
as in
I'll edit this post after I have tested the if(a,b,c) form.
edit: maybe I've been given an advice before on that issue but I don't remember which...
edit2: this is the blend shader from http://indigorenderer.com/forum/viewtop ... 68#p130468
edit3: when I have seemingly reverted all if statements, I got this confusing message:wich seems to originate from my way of using the multifractal function. Does it still exist ? This is with 4.0.38 sorry about the mess.
Code: Select all
Error while building scene: Error occurred while parsing function 'clouds': Expected identifier 'else'.
buffer, line 16:
range = (if(useBox==1) ((pos.z - bottom)/offset) else ((D - bottom) / offset))
^
Indigo version: Indigo Renderer v4.0.38, Windows 64-bit build.
Code: Select all
useBox = paramBox()==1
bottom = paramBottom()
top = paramTop()
offset = top - bottom
range = (if(useBox==1) ((pos.z - bottom)/offset) else ((D - bottom) / offset))
edit: maybe I've been given an advice before on that issue but I don't remember which...
edit2: this is the blend shader from http://indigorenderer.com/forum/viewtop ... 68#p130468
edit3: when I have seemingly reverted all if statements, I got this confusing message:
Code: Select all
Failed to find function 'l111l1ll11l1l1lllllll1ll11l11llll(int, vec3, float, float, float, float)'.
ShaderDisplaceMatParameter user shader code, line 61:
l11ll1ll1llll11ll11ll11ll1l111l11 = (l111l1ll11l1l1lllllll1ll11l11llll(0, (ll1111l1l11lllll1111l1l1l1l11l11l * 0.35f), 0.f, 4.f, 8.f, ll11l111ll1ll1l1lll11l1ll111lllll(ll11llll1l11l111llll1l1lll1l1l11l)) * 0.1f)
Last edited by CTZn on Mon Aug 29, 2016 12:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Oscar J
- Posts: 2204
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 3:47 am
- Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
- 3D Software: Blender
Re: Indigo Renderer 4.0.43 Beta Release
Yeah, looks like they have some work to do in this aspect. It's already supposed to be pretty linear, but It guess it hasn't been tested with that many GPUs.TonyD wrote:
Just wanted to share and am interested to hear if development may later yield a more linear achievable speed with added GPU, such that more GPU does not at a point negatively congest the flow.
Regards!
-Tony D
- arc en ciel
- Posts: 138
- Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2016 2:33 am
Re: Indigo Renderer 4.0.43 Beta Release
this statement worksCTZn wrote:There's an issue with the if statement.
Code: Select all
if( belowClouds,
cloudless,
clouds
)
that happen in GPU mode only, right ?CTZn wrote:I got this confusing message:wich seems to originate from my way of using the multifractal function. Does it still exist ? This is with 4.0.38 sorry about the mess.Code: Select all
Failed to find function 'l111l1ll11l1l1lllllll1ll11l11llll(int, vec3, float, float, float, float)'. ShaderDisplaceMatParameter user shader code, line 61: l11ll1ll1llll11ll11ll11ll1l111l11 = (l111l1ll11l1l1lllllll1ll11l11llll(0, (ll1111l1l11lllll1111l1l1l1l11l11l * 0.35f), 0.f, 4.f, 8.f, ll11l111ll1ll1l1lll11l1ll111lllll(ll11llll1l11l111llll1l1lll1l1l11l)) * 0.1f)
Re: Indigo Renderer 4.0.43 Beta Release
Yes that's what I call the if(a,b,c) form, and it does work.
No, I have not updated my CG board yet. It manages GPU Acceleration but not OpenCL rendering, that was all on CPU's. I have kind of fixed it by reverting to fbm's instead of multifractal...
Merci !
No, I have not updated my CG board yet. It manages GPU Acceleration but not OpenCL rendering, that was all on CPU's. I have kind of fixed it by reverting to fbm's instead of multifractal...
Merci !
Re: Indigo Renderer 4.0.43 Beta Release
CTZn wrote:Yes that's what I call the if(a,b,c) form, and it does work.
No, I have not updated my CG board yet. It manages GPU Acceleration but not OpenCL rendering, that was all on CPU's. I have kind of fixed it by reverting to fbm's instead of multifractal...
Merci !
Try
if a then b else c
Re: Indigo Renderer 4.0.43 Beta Release
Should be fixed for 4.0.45.Originalplan® wrote:Material upload still does not work. Same problem as reported before.
Re: Indigo Renderer 4.0.43 Beta Release
Hi all,
This is my first post on this amazing forum! :) And I need some help!
I am using SKindigo to create a short animation sequence; 25 fps with a 10 sec. scene transition between 2 scenes. So far, I noticed the following issues (I also included images to better illustrate the problem):
- Indigo defaults to path tracing before rendering a new scene in the render queue.
- Clamp contribution is turned off before rendering a new scene in the queue.
- Open CL is turned off before rendering a new scene in the render queue
Is there a way to override these behaviors? So that user defined render settings on one scene does not change and is implemented across all scenes in the render queue?
Comments and/or suggestion would be greatly appreciated!
:)
This is my first post on this amazing forum! :) And I need some help!
I am using SKindigo to create a short animation sequence; 25 fps with a 10 sec. scene transition between 2 scenes. So far, I noticed the following issues (I also included images to better illustrate the problem):
- Indigo defaults to path tracing before rendering a new scene in the render queue.
- Clamp contribution is turned off before rendering a new scene in the queue.
- Open CL is turned off before rendering a new scene in the render queue
Is there a way to override these behaviors? So that user defined render settings on one scene does not change and is implemented across all scenes in the render queue?
Comments and/or suggestion would be greatly appreciated!
:)
Re: Indigo Renderer 4.0.43 Beta Release
Lamme: check out the 4.0.44 release, with queue settings overrides: http://www.indigorenderer.com/forum/vie ... =1&t=14118
Re: Indigo Renderer 4.0.43 Beta Release
Ahw yesss I forgot about it, that's what I've been told once already. Thanks again !OnoSendai wrote:CTZn wrote:Yes that's what I call the if(a,b,c) form, and it does work.
No, I have not updated my CG board yet. It manages GPU Acceleration but not OpenCL rendering, that was all on CPU's. I have kind of fixed it by reverting to fbm's instead of multifractal...
Merci !
Try
if a then b else c
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 116 guests