ditto
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Leo Quensel <[email protected]> wrote: > Seriously - this is one of my biggest feature requests ever since I found > out it is not possible. > > -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > > Datum: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 11:29:46 -0500 > > Von: Alan Fregtman <[email protected]> > > An: XSI Mailing List <[email protected]> > > Betreff: Re: Cage deform by cluster > > > Hehe, I knew ICE was slower for this hence my more traditional solution. > > > > It's dissapointing, but ICE is just not fast enough when it comes to > > singlethreaded things and it has a lot of overhead. It kicks ass and > takes > > names when it comes to large datasets (where it magically slices up > > operations to many threads) like with most deformers, but with simple > > tasks > > it's slow. > > > > Maybe if and when we ever become able to set an icetree on a group of > > objects and drive everything from 1 tree, then it could potentially be > > better. — 2400 icetrees is nuts, no matter how simple. :p > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Rob Chapman <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > and my timings are 2400 nulls in 54 minutes. A rate of 44.4 nulls > > > constrained per minute on 2013SP1 64bit dual Xeon X5680s @3.33ghz - my > > > workstation must be faster. > > > > > > still, a ridiculous amount of time for such a basic task. Alan's > script > > > btw took 2 minutes to create, place and constrain all 2400 nulls. A > very > > > clear winner. > > > > > > apologies for the noise! > > > > > > > > > best > > > > > > Rob > > > > > > > > > On 11 January 2013 13:20, Nuno Conceicao > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > >> Sorry mate, i made a mistake on my initial null amount, i had 2x more > > >> nulls than i needed, i counted triangles instead of polys,duh!, i > > changed > > >> my post a bit too late. > > >> Anyways, ive cut the time to half, but still was very slow, i think > > once > > >> it is large data sets it can get very slow in softimage doing things, > > in > > >> any case after i got rid of the excess nulls, i only got 2-3 fps while > > on > > >> the contrained to cluster nulls i got 4+ FPS. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Rob Chapman > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > >> > > >>> wow, very interesting! 2 hours to constrain 2800 nulls - so thats > > only > > >>> 15 nulls per minute , bit of a joke! Am sorry for suggesting it, I > > really > > >>> did not appreciate how slow it is and thought the menu call to ICE > > > >>> Kinematics > transform objects by particles might have been more > > >>> optimised than Alan's Python script.. definitely not! maybe its > > written in > > >>> VBscript or...? :) > > >>> > > >>> I guess the serious rigger constrainers are best to stick with Python > > >>> scripted solutions for now. > > >>> > > >>> Also couldnt understand how it took so long as the example I made > with > > >>> few hundred wasnt that tedious to wait, so testing it out on a grid > > quick > > >>> with 2400 nulls , the progress bar is already past 1/4 way though and > > its > > >>> only been 5 minutes... oh wait screens frozen and gone white - will > > let you > > >>> know final time if it finishes, just going for lunch! :D > > >>> > > >>> its obviously not multithreaded as only 1 core out of 24 is in use > for > > >>> this procedure - what a waste! > > >>> > > >>> cheers > > >>> > > >>> Rob > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On 11 January 2013 12:47, Nuno Conceicao > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> took nearly 2 hours to apply the transform to all the nulls, after, > > to > > >>>> tes > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > > >
