Dynamic memory limit?

[DaForce]

yeah that was the demo.

Ok, please check the vraylog for any info about the crashes. There may be some helpfull info there.

[jacksc02]

ubik, I have found that proxies are not always the best solution and most time instanced geometry will render faster and use less memory.

[UBIKmh]

Yes, I found that out too, so I'm now working with a file that uses only instances of geometry, No proxies.

I'm afraid the Vray log is not realy an option, Max just disappears from the screen.

The scene rendered ok as stills in max 6 and vray 1.09. Unfortunately I need more speed and the faster computers run with Max9.

Could this be one of those typecal Max 9 things?

And to be complete, yes everything is 64 bit.

Marc

[ene.xis]

ditto!
just use proxies if ur scene runs out of memory when rendering...

other then that i really think that behavior is a little off...i d strip down the scene back to meshes and try to render with a mid gray material overide, and see what happens..

[DaForce]

It shouldnt crash... period.
If its not memory its something else funny.

Try as ene.xis said with the material override.

Since this is a file straight from max6, make sure to re-do all render settings, and materials so that you dont have 50 subdivs for things...eeek that will kill your render times.

Often in the vray log it will warn for potential problems before the crash, so if you havnt looked.. please do.

[glorybound]

memory

I had a scene that I modeled and staged at home, using proxies, and brought it to work the next day. My office machine is 4x what I have at home, but with this scene it took twice as long to render at work. I don't know if it was a proxy issue, but this info might help someone troubleshoot.

[UBIKmh]

Now, it's rendering fine (single frame) in MAX 6 with the old Vray. But it uses up to 3.6 gig of memory. But that is with all the displacement on (forgot to uncheck it).
So far MAX 9 refuses to render, even 1 frame. The wierd thing is that it rendered fine yesterday!!!! it prerendered the irr and the lc. Now it crashes when it starts the lc.

I've checked all the 50 subdiv stuff. All where allready changed to reasonable levels.

I'm now trying a material override..... no luck.. also crashed.

Marc

[DaForce]

Are you re-calcing the IR and LC for this scene in max9? or are you using the pre-calced stuff from yesterday?

[UBIKmh]

Both options don't work.

I now started to merge everthing in a new file. With all the xrefs, that it some work.

Only warning in the log file is the scene boundery box warning. That never gave me any trouble before, but you never know.
When I have everthing merged into a new scene I'll also make a scaled down version, see if that makes a difference.

Marc

[UBIKmh]

OK, I think I nailed the problem.

I merged everthing into a new file, tryed to render, didn't work. Split everthing up in xrefs again, didsn't work. Then I merged everthing into a meters files (was working in mm) slit everthing up in xrefs again, and now it works.

I used to just ignore the bounding box message, but those days are over. Meters is the way to go. The floating point calculation are very different in 64 bit.

So now it's running again doing new lc and irr, let's hope that tomorrow it will render fine.

Thanks for all the input on options to check guys. With differential diagnoses every idea helps to check as much as possible.

Marc

[jacksc02]

good to hear its sorted

[UBIKmh]

Yes, works like a dream now and much faster too then the first run.

I tryed the same trick with another animation and that renders faster too. No more "buckets taking forever" or 2d displacements messing everything up.

I should add a line in the topic about the "boundery edges".

Marc

[silver]

just checking if i understood well. are you saying that in milimeters you render went faster without memory problems?

[UBIKmh]

No, I was saying that it went faster in meters.

Millimeters turned out to be the problem (too many numbers probably).

Marc

[CCS]

This reminds me - I was going to ask Vlado if the same applied to inches vs. feet. Only a 12x rather than a 1000x, so I suppose it might not be an issue. Just sounds odd to me.

Is there something vray is "happier" with? Way back when, I was told to use inches.