Hey list,
I'm currently working on a car commercial and most of the stuff here was done in
cinema4d before and is meant to be made in softimage.
After a view tests we realized that the view port is a lot slower than the c4d
one.
previously they took the shell of the car in render resolution
I thought the softimage viewport was fast a couple of years back but right
now it's even a lot slower than 3ds max viewport :(
Hope they can make improvements on it.
/Jens
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Christian Freisleder m...@buntepixel.euwrote:
**
Hey list,
I'm currently working on
To: Christian Freisleder; softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Softimage Viewport rather slow?
I thought the softimage viewport was fast a couple of years back but
right now it's even a lot slower than 3ds max viewport :(
Hope they can make improvements on it.
/Jens
On Tue, Jan 8
:56 AM
*To:* Christian Freisleder; softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
*Subject:* Re: Softimage Viewport rather slow?
** **
I thought the softimage viewport was fast a couple of years back but right
now it's even a lot slower than 3ds max viewport :(
Hope they can make improvements
I would suggest doing a similar test with a clean scene and a cube with
that same amount of polys, at least to be sure if the problem is not in the
scene and its hardware/drivers related.
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Christian Freisleder m...@buntepixel.euwrote:
**
Hey list,
I'm
mhhh, i agree the speed could always be better, but 20fps doesnt sound
that bad imo...
(seriosly, most character animation scenes i`ve seen (with a few chars)
are way slower
to interact (maya and soft), and somehow char-animators get by, (welcome
to the world of flipbooks ;) )
i`m also not
Sorry I have to disagree, its quite bad considering its not deforming that
geometry, i just did a primitive here with 2.5 million polys and animated
it, full camera view 1920x1200 I get 80-90 fps in Shaded mode, 120 FPS in
wireframe and I dont have a Quadro 4000, just a GTX 480 (gtx 4xx and above
hey christian,
jep, softimage sucks with a lot of objects and i bet there are some user normal
properties on it. so welcome in a world of pain . . .
i would recommend a low-res version, as additional resolution in a reference
model.
btw: give them sponzaguys an hug.
Am 08.01.2013 um 12:02
I totally agree, and that's what I've done before.
But! always having the renderresolution model in your scene and just hiding the
stuff you don't need to see for the animatic is a lot better.
I think once you're used to it, you don't wanna go back.
Everything else is just a workaround to
Hey Sebastian,
I already suggested this, but there are other things too like the car rig is
already there and production proven in cinema and tranferring the animation
isn't that much of a problem. Still using softimage for shading in Vray and
other stuff.
a big hug back from here too. :)
You could try an ugly hack:
Export the outer shell to Zbrush and decimate it there.
It will most likely give you holes and errors here and there
but the overall shape may survive reasonably well even around
some 50K-100K polys. Manually polishing/merging/optimizing
here and there may improve
Well, last month we did a project with a car with 11 million polygons,
quite heavy, so I did just a quick test to fit these requirements.
Got rid of excess geo until i got something around 2.5 million polys, still
was left with 146 objects so parented them to a null and made it spin on
full camera
hey Tim,
I tryed that already an it kind of works but its extra work.
Getting the animation out of cinema takes 1min and setting up a link to the
animated nulls another 5.
as the animation pipeline exists in cinema there is no point in switching to
soft until the viewport gets faster.
@Nuno
its
A month back I got a really nice car model from a client, probably the best
car model I've ever seen. It was in 3ds Max format so I had to export to
fbx and import it in Softimage.
The first thing I always do is to remove the user normals from the whole
scene, otherwise the viewport performance
Just curious here. Why are proxy models not an option?
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com on behalf of Jens Lindgren
Sent: Tue 08/01/2013 13:34
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Softimage Viewport rather slow?
A month back I got
wrote:
Just curious here. Why are proxy models not an option?
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com on behalf of Jens Lindgren
Sent: Tue 08/01/2013 13:34
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Softimage Viewport rather slow?
A month back I
2013 um 14:55
geschrieben:
Just curious here. Why are proxy models not an option?
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com on behalf of Jens Lindgren
Sent: Tue 08/01/2013 13:34
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Softimage Viewport rather
17 matches
Mail list logo
