was Just saying if someone would like I think there has been in depth
discussion about it I believe.  Wasn't meaning to contradict you if it came
off like that.  3 weeks no days off shortest day 13 hours brain left last
week.

Randy S. Little
http://www.rslittle.com/
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2325729/



On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Nathan Rusch <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Yup, and that's part of what I said. I just wanted to point out that
> multiple file sequences *does* introduce its own form of overhead, but it's
> still almost always the better option.
>
>
> *From:* Randy Little <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Friday, September 11, 2015 4:29 PM
> *To:* Nuke user discussion <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs
>
> Can't speak to multipart at all but there has always been discussion on
> the list about monolithic multichannel files not being faster in
> traditional networked workflows.  I"m sure I can find the archives and
> repost those results.  (pretty sure actually data)
>
> Randy S. Little
> http://www.rslittle.com/
> http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2325729/
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Nathan Rusch <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> It has to *open* the file, yes, but opening does not imply reading.
>>
>> One of the main points of a multi-part file is to allow discrete access
>> to each part. As far as I know, hardly any renderers currently support
>> writing multi-part files though, and your 3D guys may not know how to set
>> them up even if they could, so chances are you're looking at 1.x files.
>>
>> To partially echo Thorsten, I think in theory multi-part files should be
>> faster than separate file sequences (I say "in theory" because I haven't
>> done any benchmarking of my own).
>>
>> Multiple file sequences generally beat monolithic single-part (i.e.
>> multi-layer EXR 1.x) files because of Nuke's selective channel access
>> behavior. In other words, you are rarely reading all of your AOVs at the
>> same time and same place in the node tree, but you are still paying the
>> decompression/read cost for all of them whenever one is read. Incremental
>> improvements to Nuke's caching system may have improved the situation with
>> mutli-layer 1.x files somewhat though.
>>
>> On the other side, using multiple sequences trades the
>> "read-and-decompress-everything" requirement for the overhead of requiring
>> Nuke to at least open and read each file's header in order to determine
>> what channels are available (regardless of what channels are actually being
>> read). If you use network storage like most people, this overhead can
>> increase quite a bit due to latency, cluster cache eviction, etc. However,
>> it's still generally better than the alternative.
>>
>> On paper, multi-part files should ideally give you the best of both
>> worlds: encapsulation alongside piecemeal data access. To inspect the
>> available channels, Nuke only needs to open a single file, though it will
>> still need to read the header for each part (I'm assuming there's a jump
>> table at the top of the file, but I'm not sure). You can then also seek to
>> and read the data for any one layer without touching data for any others
>> (assuming each is stored in its own part). This relies on smart reader
>> plugin design on the Nuke side, as well as support for parallel access to
>> different parts in the same file.
>>
>> -Nathan
>>
>>
>> *From:* Randy Little <[email protected]>
>> *Sent:* Friday, September 11, 2015 2:57 PM
>> *To:* Nuke user discussion <[email protected]>
>> *Subject:* Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs
>>
>> Has to load the file to read it always.   Can't just load part of a
>> little endian file pretty sure.   I know here I can load a beauty pass and
>> scrub it and play around with it and do all kinds of fun things. When some
>> 3d guy decides to put 50 passes (10-15) it take longer to load and they are
>> don't scrub.
>>
>> Randy S. Little
>> http://www.rslittle.com/
>> http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2325729/
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Thorsten Kaufmann <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> This is not really true with multipart EXR files anymore. If files are
>>> interleaved by layer rathern than by scanline you loose the benefits but
>>> gain performance compared to multiple sequences. I have yet to do a full
>>> performance check but the boost seems to be rather big if you do not use
>>> all channels (if you use all channels it should not matter anyways, should
>>> it).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I expect multichannel to still have some overhead maybe, but given the
>>> downsides of splitting exrs (too many open file handles anyone?) This is a
>>> use case decicsion i would say.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Thorsten
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Thorsten Kaufmann
>>> Production Pipeline Architect
>>>
>>> Mackevision Medien Design GmbH
>>> Forststraße 7
>>> 70174 Stuttgart
>>>
>>> T +49 711 93 30 48 606
>>> F +49 711 93 30 48 90
>>> M +49 151 19 55 55 02
>>>
>>> [email protected]
>>> www.mackevision.com
>>>
>>> Geschäftsführer: Armin Pohl, Joachim Lincke
>>> HRB 243735 Amtsgericht Stuttgart
>>>
>>> ---
>>> *VFX:* Game of Thrones, Season 5 – VFX making of reel
>>> <https://vimeo.com/133433110>.
>>> *TWITTER | ADOBE BEHANCE:* Follow us on Twitter
>>> <https://twitter.com/Mackevision> and Adobe Behance
>>> <https://www.behance.net/mackevision>.
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *Von:* [email protected] <
>>> [email protected]> im Auftrag von Randy
>>> Little <[email protected]>
>>> *Gesendet:* Freitag, 11. September 2015 22:06
>>> *An:* Nuke user discussion
>>> *Betreff:* Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate
>>> exrs
>>>
>>> big huge all passes in a exr is slow.   Has to read entire file (75MB+)
>>> to find the channel you want that might be 200KB every single time you want
>>> to deal with that little mask channel.   They also seem to take longer to
>>> render out of 3d.   We usually break them up by math type and try not to
>>> stuff 20 passes into a file.
>>>
>>> Randy S. Little
>>> http://www.rslittle.com/
>>> http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2325729/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 2:31 AM, Johannes Hezer <[email protected]
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hey everyone,
>>>>
>>>> A bit of a survey question... Is anyone using multipart exrs ?
>>>> We have been using them for 2 projects and we have not done any
>>>> performance profiling, but I am not 100% sure if it is a speed bost or not,
>>>> compared to multichannel 1.xxx exrs.
>>>> I was hoping might come close to splitted exrs (each layer in a single
>>>> file) ...
>>>>
>>>> Looking forward to some input
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> Johannes
>>>>
>>>> Von meinem iPhone gesendet
>>>>
>>>> ____ ESET 12236 (20150911) ____
>>>> The message was checked by ESET Mail Security.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to