CoolColJ's test pics thread

Get feedback from others on your works in progress
joedizzle
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2012 4:29 am

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by joedizzle » Sun Jul 01, 2012 4:31 am

Zom-B wrote:
CoolColJ wrote:real camera have way more diffraction at the same fstop as Indigo - me thinks the simulation needs tweaking :wink:
Maybe that (sadly still not released) Paper could be a good starting point:
Polynomial Optics: A Construction Kit for Efficient Ray-Tracing of Lens Systems
It's here, http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~hullin/#publications, interesting paper!

User avatar
CoolColJ
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:47 pm

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by CoolColJ » Sat Jul 14, 2012 3:00 pm

Trying out an old exit portal test scene from Indigo v2 with v3.4.2
with an i7 970 - 6 core at 3.85ghz

Damn clean for only 4 mins and 363 samples :shock:
i7-970_3.85ghz_exit_portal_test.jpg
Ha - only 1 min, this new improved BPT is pretty fast... ahh memories of the old days with a Pentium 4 are no more...
970_3.85ghz_displacement_shader_test.jpg

Anyone with an x58 board, definitely pick up a second hand i7 970. Not much slower than a 3930k at the same clock speed, but it won't overclock as well. Runs much cooler than an i7 920 or 930 at the same clock speed!

User avatar
dcm
Posts: 663
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:55 am

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by dcm » Sun Jul 15, 2012 8:31 pm

2600k ftw

User avatar
CoolColJ
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:47 pm

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by CoolColJ » Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:42 pm

dcm wrote:2600k ftw
2 cores short of penile length :mrgreen:

StompinTom
Indigo 100
Posts: 1828
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 3:33 pm

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by StompinTom » Mon Jul 16, 2012 9:52 am

CoolColJ wrote:
dcm wrote:2600k ftw
2 cores short of penile length :mrgreen:

Baha!

Coming from a 980X over here...

FoXar
Posts: 139
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:57 pm

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by FoXar » Mon Jul 16, 2012 10:47 pm

StompinTom wrote:
CoolColJ wrote:
dcm wrote:2600k ftw
2 cores short of penile length :mrgreen:

Baha!

Coming from a 980X over here...
Oh don't "Baha!" too much, also have a 980X, clocked at 3.8GHz and watercooled..
Let's see who is "Baha-ing!" next :mrgreen:
Cheers,
Roo Evans

User avatar
CoolColJ
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:47 pm

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by CoolColJ » Tue Aug 09, 2016 11:16 am

Trying to brute force this on my EVGA GTX 1070 FTW
and OpenCL path tracing - think I might resolve fairly well overnight :D

The underwater block seems to converge better than with MLT though
CCJ_Displacement_Pool_OpenCLPT.jpg

User avatar
Oscar J
1st Place Winner
Posts: 2204
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 3:47 am
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
3D Software: Blender

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by Oscar J » Tue Aug 09, 2016 11:32 am

Oh man, classic thread. :) This is a gruesome task for single dir PT.

User avatar
lycium
Posts: 1216
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 7:46 am
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by lycium » Tue Aug 09, 2016 12:20 pm

I'm so glad to see this classic thread again, after 4 long years :D

User avatar
pixie
Indigo 100
Posts: 2332
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 4:54 am
Location: Away from paradise
3D Software: Cinema 4D
Contact:

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by pixie » Wed Aug 10, 2016 4:28 am

Epic thread is epic! :D

User avatar
CoolColJ
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:47 pm

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by CoolColJ » Fri Mar 25, 2022 3:14 am

So I have a Ryzen 5950x system now.... it's quite a bit faster than my previous Intel 3930k system :lol:
Also MSI RTX 3070 Trio

I decided try this classic scene out again, and the underwater bits were a bit slow to resolve, with a low sun angle, using the captured simulation, but started to show up after 10000 samples per pixels.

Now after 9 hours, at 6+ million samples per sec and 700k samples per pixel, it's actually fairly resolved :shock: :D
Displacement_Pool_23_SunSet_2.png

edit - I get 7 Million samples per sec with latest release candidate on the same scene

I also found setting the max path depth to higher numbers to be helpful, like over 32. I used 99
Especially in scene with high reflection and refraction. The caustics develop better and faster

User avatar
Headroom
Indigo 100
Posts: 1058
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 1:07 pm
Location: Spartanburg, SC, USA
Contact:

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by Headroom » Fri Mar 25, 2022 4:46 am

LOL, yes not a surprise. What render mode did you use for that image ?
The mention of max path depth indicates GPU use. But I would have imagined that the bidirectional path tracing, perhaps even with MLT converge much faster than brute force path tracing on the GPU.

I've got a number of renders where GPU rendering appears to be almost helpless. I can share those but don't want to spoil your thread with my images.

User avatar
CoolColJ
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:47 pm

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by CoolColJ » Fri Mar 25, 2022 6:21 am

Headroom wrote:
Fri Mar 25, 2022 4:46 am
LOL, yes not a surprise. What render mode did you use for that image ?
The mention of max path depth indicates GPU use. But I would have imagined that the bidirectional path tracing, perhaps even with MLT converge much faster than brute force path tracing on the GPU.

I've got a number of renders where GPU rendering appears to be almost helpless. I can share those but don't want to spoil your thread with my images.

Bidrectional MLT on CPU... so the max path depth has no effect on CPU then?

It's much worse on GPU :)

Feel free to post in this thread

User avatar
CoolColJ
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:47 pm

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by CoolColJ » Fri Mar 25, 2022 8:26 am

I have rendered this one before, but I always lost patience with it as it takes ages to converge.
Now with a faster CPU I redid it, and it took till 15k samples/pixel before the details started to show more on the red cyclinder, and +30K till more details showed up.

At 75+k S/P after 88 mins of rendering I think it's close to full converged :)
im1648147855.png

User avatar
CoolColJ
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:47 pm

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by CoolColJ » Fri Mar 25, 2022 10:15 pm

ran this one for over 10 hours, restarted a few times, and the underwater block did eventually converge at 400k samples/pixel. I think another 5 hours will make it smoother.

So in 5 years time when CPUs are 10x faster, this will be no big deal, relatively speaking :)
im1648155876.png
im1648168180.png

Post Reply
695 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests