Nuke must be using RAM for some kind of caching. Otherwise what's the "Clear Buffers" option in the cache menu?
Ron Ganbar email: [email protected] tel: +44 (0)7968 007 309 [UK] +972 (0)54 255 9765 [Israel] url: http://ronganbar.wordpress.com/ On 11 February 2012 20:15, Nathan Rusch <[email protected]> wrote: > Remember, Fusion and AE both use RAM caching; I'm not sure whether Toxik > uses RAM as well, or whether it's disk based (someone else can probably > confirm one way or the other). The "cache" knob (or Ctrl B) on Nuke nodes > is the closest you can really get to a RAM caching scheme in Nuke at this > point, though I don't know if this data is even kept around between frames. > > -Nathan > > On Feb 11, 2012, at 7:51 AM, "Randy Little" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thats right. That why nuke is faster to work with then AE when you are > zoomed in its only rendering what in the viewer. > But each node has a cache button Kibo. But I do agree that Toxik is CRAZY > fast. I use it to key and paint when I can. Its vector paint and raster > paint work pretty awesome when they aren't crashing. Fusion caches much > better as well. Everything seems to cache better. But a few things that > work amazing in other apps doesn't out weight the things in nuke that are > better. Nuke also isn't ever going to work the way toxik works and its > Toxik isn't always a better way. Its just the way you are used to > working. but Toxik is basically pretty dead with only minor fixes to come > and no major new features unless they rehired all the people they laid off > and didn't tell anyone. > Randy S. Little > http://reel.rslittle.com > http://imdb.com/name/nm2325729/ > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/rslittle> > > > > On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 06:49, Johan Boije <[email protected]> wrote: > >> As I said, I don't think you should expect realtime from Nuke. I'm not >> exactly sure why this is but maybe some of the over all impression has to >> do with how the viewer works, that it only renders the part of the screen >> you are looking at. But that doesn't always fit very well with how I do >> things. I like to zoom in on parts while plying and then back out again to >> see in context. This means constant re-rendering. And with a heavy script >> that is a major pain. So that's why I pre-render and render to watch in fc >> or elsewhere. >> I also have the impression that bigger script bogs viewing performance. >> Some of that might be bugs? I haven't had the time to dig deeper there. >> It's better now than it used to be anyways so I think the foundry has >> worked on improving performance. >> You can turn off thumbnails if you have a lot of reads. That might help >> a litte? >> But why the diskcache dont work like expected i'm not sure. It should >> offload that part of the script? But my exeperience is the same as yours >> that it doesnt. User error maybe? I tried it a few times but stopped using >> it. I use regular writes and prerender that way instead. >> >> With that said I agree that viewing performance is something that I'd >> like to be better. Not sure if it is possible with the current viewer >> architecture? >> And people seem to be happy with how it works so i dont know if it is >> high priority or not. Cant hurt to make your voice heard and send a mail to >> support. Put me on the list too. >> >> Cheers, >> Johan >> >> >> >> On 11 feb 2012, at 11:06, KiboOst <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> *mrhowardjones wrote:* Just use FC that comes with it, thats what its >> for. >> >> Howard >> >> Well, I would really get Nuke performance enhanced without relying on an >> external program making workflow quite cumbersome. And once back into Nuke >> after FC, I have still to render the comp, when once cached by nuke it >> should just write cache into image sequence if I make no change on the >> comp. We are not weta or DD and we try to keep things simple, fast, and >> flexible. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Nuke-users mailing list >> [email protected], <http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/> >> http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Nuke-users mailing list >> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >> > > _______________________________________________ > Nuke-users mailing list > [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ > http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users > > > _______________________________________________ > Nuke-users mailing list > [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ > http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >
_______________________________________________ Nuke-users mailing list [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
