CompuServe Thread

#3dsr3 troubles

23 messages in this thread
#101569From: MICHAEL CORTESEMay 13, 1994 5:20 PM
Anyone, I just received 3dsr3 upgrade. I have an animation with 100 frames and I am trying to render them to disk(Bernoulli) using .jpg format. It does fine to frame twenty something, but then it either gets out of rendering to Keyframer mode with no error message or it reboots my computer. Any suggestions are appreciated. I have a 486-66, 16M RAM, and with this system had no trouble with 3dsr2. Thanks, Mike C.
#101585From: Brian Rudolph [Adesk]May 13, 1994 6:55 PM
Mike, Depending on the compression ratio, JPG's can take up a lot of disk space. Are you possibly running out of Hard disk space? Check the amount of open disk space where the phar lap swap files and 3ds temp files are being directed. -Brian
#101595From: John EllisMay 13, 1994 8:23 PM
>> JPG's can take up a lot of disk space. << Typically JPG's are a quarter the size of a TGA or less. Do you mean that when using JPG's that the swap file is larger than when rendering to a TGA or TIF file? -JE
#101973From: Brian Rudolph [Adesk]May 16, 1994 10:01 AM
<<Typically JPG's are a quarter the size of a TGA or less. Do you mean that when using JPG's that the swap file is larger than when rendering to a TGA or TIF file?>> The size of the JPG image really depends on the amount of compression you decide for the image to have. I have seen JPG images set for no or little compression that are only slightly smaller than a corresponding TGA file. When you are rendering the image, the size of the swap file would be about the same no matter which format you were rendering to. The only time the swap file might be different is when 3DS is storing and writing TEMP files in the format you chose, prior to writing the actual file. -Brian
#102053From: John EllisMay 16, 1994 4:51 PM
Brian, >> I have seen JPG images set for no or little compression that are only slightly smaller than a corresponding TGA file. << That's very interesting. My experience so far has been as I said a quarter the size with the minimum compression. Something for me to check into further. I was trying to clarify what you were saying and your answer to my first question answered it. My experience is that as you said its the size of the scene one is rendering not the final format that determines swap file size. Its been a long time since I swapped a file out. But that's what I remembered. Thanks, knowing that JPG's can be significantly larger than has been my experience is good to know. -JE
#102069From: Joseph M. WilsonMay 16, 1994 6:03 PM
Hey John, Do you know of any command-line utility (such as VGASHOW) that will display jpgs? Preferably script-able, so I can give a client 1 3.5" disk to preview instead of 3?! My experience with JPGs has been that they are at least a quarter of the size of TGA, and usually much smaller. FWIW –John PS — Thanks again for the info on the gamma situation — very helpful
#102086From: John EllisMay 16, 1994 7:15 PM
John, You're very welcome on the help with gamma. With regard to .JPG's I don't know of a utility to display them. I use a program called Leadview which provides a .CMP file which has better compression and less loss. They provide a viewer with it. Its a complete image management system and includes a basic paint package. It will also play AVI files amoung other things. They can be reached on Compuserve at 71333,2237 GO LEADTECH or by phone at 704-549-5532 -JE
#102251From: John EllisMay 17, 1994 12:12 PM
John, I think I'm trading brain cells for pixels, good thing I've got a few. <g> The LEAD 3.0 supports JPG but the file type is called JFIF. It supports a whole slew of file formats. Its got more features than I can begin to describe. Well worth the $99 in my opinion. Good tech support BTW. -JE
#102345From: Joseph M. WilsonMay 17, 1994 5:55 PM
I'll look into it– thanks again! –John
#102100From: MARTIN G FOSTERMay 16, 1994 8:11 PM
Joseph, image alchemy (imgalc.zip – use the graphics filefinder to locate it) is a cool shareware conversion and display utility that will work on images up to 640×480 (you can register to get support for higher rez's). I have the full-blown version and use it every day. I guess it's capable of a simple slideshow – no frills.
#102346From: Joseph M. WilsonMay 17, 1994 5:55 PM
I'll look for it — thanks for jumping in!! –John
#102146From: M. G. BATCHELORMay 16, 1994 11:03 PM
PMJI John, and this is a little off the subject focus – but I recently had an experience where I substituted all JPEG's for the original TGA texture maps in a scene. Even though the JPEG's were highly compressed and about 1/20 the size of the TGA's, they actually required slightly *_MORE_* memory in 3DS to render. Interesting, thought I'd mention it. BILL
#102156From: John EllisMay 17, 1994 12:09 AM
Bill, >> they actually required slightly *_MORE_* memory in 3DS. << Yes that's interesting, by more do you mean more than the original TGA's required? In other words even though the image was compressed to 1/20th the size it took more memory than the original image? That's probably what you said but I wanted to be clear on it. Thanks, -JE
#102256From: M. G. BATCHELORMay 17, 1994 12:44 PM
Yes, mapped with the MUCH smaller JPEG's, a rendering required MORE memory. BILL
#102235From: Yost GroupMay 17, 1994 10:35 AM
I'm pretty sure that the reason why the JPEG's required slightly more RAM than the Targa's is because JPEG's require a little bit of buffer space for decompression, wheras Targa's don't. – G
#102258From: M. G. BATCHELORMay 17, 1994 12:44 PM
Thanks for clearing that up, as I have been curious about it. BILL
#102475From: John TissavaryMay 18, 1994 5:54 AM
Garys answer makes a lot of sense. I've noticed it takes much longer to open a jpg file than an equal resolution .tga, and it's not disk access that's making the difference.
#102538From: M. G. BATCHELORMay 18, 1994 10:52 AM
Yep. I imagine the longer load times for JPEG files is due to the more complex decompression that must take place. What did surprise me when using JPEG TMaps was the quality of the rendering was generally much better than expected. While there was no benefit in using them from a memory conservation standpoint (a loss actually), using them did decrease render times substantially. However, I haven't laid any animation to tape which used them, but I could imagine there could be problems. If not, and you can get away with it in certain situations, it is nice to know you can expedite long render times with no great perceivable degradation. I'll have to try this sometime <g>. BILL
#102672From: John TissavaryMay 18, 1994 7:53 PM
Wow, I'm going to try using jpegs for some texture maps, in the future. I guess it's best to use the highly compressed ones for distant maps, and tga's or nearly un-compressed jpegs for close ups. I should've gotten my Matrox MAX already, but I'm sure it'll be here today or tommorrow, unless UPS (I really hate UPS, BTW) screwed things up. I'll let you know how it works. They're getting 4.2 to 4.5 megs per second throughput with the Seagate Barracude 2.1gig SCSI drive, which is the one I bought for it. I think compression levels should be acceptable for many animations.
#103014From: David J. MarksMay 20, 1994 7:31 AM
>> However, I haven't laid any animation to tape which used them, but I >> could imagine there could be problems. We use the Hi-8 format, which tends to be a bit "noisy". JPEG artifacts don't show up enough for this media to show a noticible difference. >> If not, and you can get away with it in certain situations, it is nice >> to know you can expedite long render times with no great perceivable >> degradation I don't think using JPEG will expedite rendering times much, but it does save valuable hard drive space when rendering lots of frames.
#101613From: MICHAEL CORTESEMay 13, 1994 10:52 PM
Thanks for responding!! The time it went back to Keyframer, I went to DOS from 3d Studio and there was 7M left on my hard disk. That is where it swaps. The Bernoulli 150M had plenty of space for the .jpg files. Any other suggestions? Thanks, Mike C.
#101966From: David J. MarksMay 16, 1994 9:17 AM
>> and there was 7M left on my hard disk. That is where it swaps. 7MB really is tight when it comes to swapping. Press "?" in 3ds to see how much it is attempting to swap out. If you want to do the math, there is a good section in the manuals about memory usage. It is VERY possible that a relatively simple rendering could swap out 10MB or more (depending on how much RAM you have, of course). I rendered a fairly complex architectural scene on a system with 32 MB RAM, and still swapped out close to 16 MB. If you find that the status box shows swapping on a regular basis, you should think about adding more RAM. In the mean time, make some more space on your hard drive, just in case…
#101974From: Brian Rudolph [Adesk]May 16, 1994 10:02 AM
Michale, David is absolutely right. You need more Swap file space. 7MB is VERY small. -Brian