CompuServe Thread

#One of those weeks…

6 messages in this thread
#168342From: Dan O'LearyMay 5, 1995 9:56 AM
Ever had one of those weeks where it seems as though your PC is possessed by Beelzabubba himself? Well, it's been one for me. This last episode has pushed me over the brink…. We are network rendering a relatively simple animation (300 frames). It uses a highlight and a lens flare from Yost's disk #1. Also uses some animated maps, including opacity. 2 of the 4 machines on the network are rendering everything about 20% larger than the others. It was very easy to figure out which machines… the geometry is noticeably larger in the keyframer display. Any suggestions? We have been using net render since November without a hitch. While I am at it, what would cause a material to appear slightly transparent in a camera view rendering that renders opaque in an ortho view? – Dan / n-Space, Inc.
#168355From: Jonas Ruikis [ADESK]May 5, 1995 11:37 AM
<< . 2 of the 4 machines on the network are rendering everything about 20% larger than the others. I >> Were these camera views?
#168374From: Dan O'LearyMay 5, 1995 12:43 PM
>> Were these camera views? << Nope. Front views. – Dan / n-Space, Inc.
#168385From: Jonas Ruikis [ADESK]May 5, 1995 1:23 PM
Hi Dan, << Nope. Front views. >> Greg Pyros posted a message back in March that warned people to use camera views only for consistant net-renders.. The thread was called Help with Isometric View but I don't have it. 🙁 Greg?
#168501From: David StinnettMay 6, 1995 2:06 AM
If you set all the slaves and workstations to have the exact same main display size, then they -should- all render properly. If some machines are set, for example, to 800×600 and some to 1024×768, then the 800×600 machines will render the objects in frame larger than the other machines. Of course, the safest way to go would be to always use a camera when possible. David
#168388From: ALAN IGLESIASMay 5, 1995 1:37 PM
Just a guess Dan, but are your slaves using discrete process directorys? ie, where each slave sees *only* a local directory for it's processes? If not, you might try this as a last resort… FWIW, -Alan