Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs

> *Von:* nuke-users-boun...@support.thefoundry.co.uk < > nuke-users-boun...@support.thefoundry.co.uk> im Auftrag von Nathan Rusch < > nathan_ru...@hotmail.com> > *Gesendet:* Montag, 14. September 2015 19:26 > *An:* Johannes Hezer; Nuke user disc

AW: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs

net/mackevision>. Von: nuke-users-boun...@support.thefoundry.co.uk <nuke-users-boun...@support.thefoundry.co.uk> im Auftrag von Nathan Rusch <nathan_ru...@hotmail.com> Gesendet: Montag, 14. September 2015 19:26 An: Johannes Hezer; Nuke user discussion Betreff: Re: [Nuke-users]

Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs

How many files are too many? Just curious Den 14 sep 2015 08:30 skrev "Daniel Hartlehnert" : > > Am 13.09.2015 um 11:04 schrieb Johannes Hezer: > > > As we are under Windows I never want to run into the "too many open files" > error again. > > > Just a side note: i experienced the

Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs

Am 13.09.2015 um 11:04 schrieb Johannes Hezer: > > As we are under Windows I never want to run into the "too many open files" > error again. Just a side note: i experienced the "too many open files" error on linux as well.___ Nuke-users mailing list

Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs

I am not sure, i think its depending on the filesystem anyway, and not on the OS. Keep in mind, that for every time operation (time offset, retime, oflow etc.) every read node upstream is counted twice ( as in two open files instead of one). Am 14.09.2015 um 09:39 schrieb Elias Ericsson

Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs

On windows I ran into this with 200-300 read nodes (too many layers and a lot of aovs)As mentioned retimes etc increase the file handles too.I think the per app file handle limit on windows was around 512 ?!On Linux you can change that and set it to 8192 and never have that problem

Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs

I think the number was, on win, 1024 data accesses. Am 14.09.2015 um 10:24 schrieb Daniel Hartlehnert: I am not sure, i think its depending on the filesystem anyway, and not on the OS. Keep in mind, that for every time operation (time offset, retime, oflow etc.) every read node upstream is

Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs

uftrag von Howard Jones <mrhowardjo...@yahoo.com <mailto:mrhowardjo...@yahoo.com>> *Gesendet:* Samstag, 12. September 2015 11:07 *An:* Nuke user discussion *Betreff:* Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs That is a good point about whi

Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs

s://www.behance.net/mackevision>. > -- > *Von:* nuke-users-boun...@support.thefoundry.co.uk < > nuke-users-boun...@support.thefoundry.co.uk> im Auftrag von Howard Jones < > mrhowardjo...@yahoo.com> > *Gesendet:* Samstag, 12. September 2015 11:0

AW: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs

s* introduce its own form of overhead, but it's still almost always the better option. From: Randy Little<mailto:randyslit...@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 4:29 PM To: Nuke user discussion<mailto:nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk> Subject: Re: [Nuke-users] Multip

Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs

gt;> 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 >>> Se

Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs

t's >> still almost always the better option. >> >> >> *From:* Randy Little <randyslit...@gmail.com> >> *Sent:* Friday, September 11, 2015 4:29 PM >> *To:* Nuke user discussion <nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk> >> *Subject:* Re: [Nuke-users] M

[Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs

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

AW: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs

n: nuke-users-boun...@support.thefoundry.co.uk <nuke-users-boun...@support.thefoundry.co.uk> im Auftrag von Randy Little <randyslit...@gmail.com> 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 i

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

Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs

access to different parts in the same file. -Nathan From: Randy Little Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 2:57 PM To: Nuke user discussion 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 f

Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs

<https://www.behance.net/mackevision>. > -- > *Von:* nuke-users-boun...@support.thefoundry.co.uk < > nuke-users-boun...@support.thefoundry.co.uk> im Auftrag von Randy Little < > randyslit...@gmail.com> > *Gesendet:* Freitag, 11. September 2015 22:06 &

Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs

ferent parts in the same file. > > -Nathan > > > *From:* Randy Little <randyslit...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Friday, September 11, 2015 2:57 PM > *To:* Nuke user discussion <nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk> > *Subject:* Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel ex

Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs

> > *From:* Randy Little <randyslit...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Friday, September 11, 2015 4:29 PM > *To:* Nuke user discussion <nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk> > *Subject:* Re: [Nuke-users] Multipart multichannel exrs vs. separate exrs > > Can't speak to mu