nybt-forum-threads PBGV's BAT Thread

[Aaron Graham 4,417]

WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I want a powerful computer so darn bad!!!!

WoW!!!! I want a powerful computer so darn bad!!!

  Edited January 29, 2012 by Aaron Graham  

[Renedius 25]

WoW!!!!

[Sgt Pepper 864]

What sort of hacking do you plan to do with that?!

[PBGV103 729]

Honestly, for the money it won't be a powerful computer, but it will at least be upgrade-able when I do need more power. That way I won't be constantly building new computers to keep up with the demands of 3ds max.

[T Wrecks 10,210]

Speaking about the requirements of 3dsmax, does anybody know on what computer the UN HQ was rendered?

[gutterclub 2,729]

I know that Todd rendered the huge Fisher body on a less than powerful machine? But I don't really know the ins and outs of Max's requirements..

Maybe there should be a thread regarding computer specs etc for Max?

[Cockatoo 2,257]

Speaking about the requirements of 3dsmax, does anybody know on what computer the UN HQ was rendered?

Sorry for the late reply! That'd be the computer that I'm at right now. It's a solid middle of the range 2009 era desktop, recently upgraded in the RAM department to accommodate the UN Project. By 2012 standards it's not so special anymore, but it still has all the power I'll ever need (at least for now.) I can't see myself upgrading for at least another 5 years anyway. Paid about $1200 AUD/USD (including OS, not including monitor) back in '09. With the RAM upgrades the total investment goes up to $1300. You could get a setup similar in power to this today, capable of exporting even the largest BAT's, for under $800 I think.

Here's some detailed specs...

OS Name: Microsoft Windows 7

Version: 6.1.7601 Service Pack 1 Build 7601

System Manufacturer: Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd.

System Model: M61PME-S2P

System Type: x64-based PC

Processor: AMD Athlon X2 250 Processor, 3000 Mhz, 2 Core(s), 2 Logical Processor(s)

Installed Physical Memory (RAM): 8.00 GB

Total Physical Memory: 8.00 GB

Display Adapter Type: GeForce GTS 250, NVIDIA compatible

Display Adapter Description: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250

Display Adapter RAM: 1.00 GB

Hard Drive Size: 465.76 GB

Max Version: 3ds Max 2012 Design

BAT4Max Version: 5

[PBGV103 729]

Your GPU has 2x the memory of my laptop, and your CPU is about 7% faster and is AMD rather than Intel, but otherwise my 2 year old MacBook Pro is about the same as your computer. My problem is I will never take the time to streamline geometry in my models. Once I've spent 100 hours on a model I don't want to spend 10x as long playing connect-the-dots with splines. It just seems like such a time consuming mess. Then there's always the one poly the just WILL NOT behave the way you want it too. Ugghhh It's a pain. So for the sake of speed and my sanity I'll be going with a system much more powerful than the one I have now.

[gutterclub 2,729]

Don't take this the wrong way but I guess it all depends on what you want to use max for?

If it's to release BATS then Cockatoo (among all the other good Baters) has released great BAT after great BAT using 'the time consuming method' so it can't be that time consuming and seems more productive than the build a powerful machine method..you could also ask what is more time consuming, modelling with a method that limits geometry or doing overtime at work, saving every penny etc etc to raise the money to pay for the machine. I'm not claiming to know your circumstances, only from what I pick up here

If you are planning to make models to sell to people, I don't particulary know the market but I'd imagine they'd want less geometry and less render times on the models? This said, I don't know much about the 3D industry.

My point is, it might be easier in the long run to perfect your modelling in terms of geometry in the scene. Even with a huge computer.

I only say this because you have and will continue to make amazing models and rather than see them on this site I'd love to see them rising in my downtowns. If I win the lottery this week I'll buy you a new machine ; )

[Aaron Graham 4,417]

Poly modeling is not hard, I'm sure I can make a glass building in no time using it.

[PBGV103 729]

Haha I know, it would be great if I could do both, but I'm still a student so I need my laptop for that, and between classes and work I don't have a ton of time to mess with poly editing. Either way I'm still getting a new computer. From what I'm making every month (which isn't much as a sales associate) I'll have about $500-600 USD per month to put into this build. That means it will still be quite a while before I make any head way, but I'm hoping that in 2-3 months I will have a working computer. With this motherboard, the minimum cost for the remaining parts would be around $1500, so don't expect anything soon.

PS. I'm also drooling over this monitor, Dell u3011, which I can get for $50 off newegg's price through where I work! haha

  Edited February 17, 2012 by PBGV103  

[Cockatoo 2,257]

Ugghhh It's a pain. So for the sake of speed and my sanity I'll be going with a system much more powerful than the one I have now.

I'm sure we'd all love to have a super-awesome desktop setup to render stuff at the speed of light, and good on you for going for that, but even a system such as mine (and therefore your laptop to a slightly lesser degree) can comfortably work into the tens of millions of polys even with complicated or intensive materials and settings such as caustics and GI enabled. Regardless of whether or not you model can efficiently, I doubt you'll ever be reaching those sorts of numbers in the first place.

The point I'm trying to make here is that for BATing alone, even for very big projects, you need a good system. You don't need a great system. I feel a little like you're trying to justify getting this uber-powerful setup just for your BATing... which based on what you've said so far just doesn't make sense. You should already be able to work with big stuff relatively easily.

Why not just say... I'm getting this super-awesome PC because it's awesome and I'll enjoy having it. People don't need cars with V8 engines in them... they don't need to get to work at 180mph. So why get one then... because they're cool, that's why!

[Francis90b 748]

Jeez, how can you ever get to work without a V8 engine inside your car !

[T Wrecks 10,210]

With a V12 engine, that's how.

Seriously, cockatoo took the words from my mouth. Right from the start I couldn't help thinking that it's not the BAT stuff that requires such an awesome rig, but that you're simply a hardware enthusiast. There's nothing wrong about that. I don't go for performance, but I like the process of picking just the components I want and assembling a PC just to my taste, so I can understand your enthusiasm about putting together that killer rig that will make Darth Vader's room inside the Death Star look like crap.

I can also understand that spending insane amounts of time tweaking a building that you've already put so much work in is by far the less attractive choice than having a rig that will render the darned thing in minutes anyway. However, I do have the impression that if you start a building with streamlined modeling techniques, no such tweaking will be needed. That doesn't help with everything you have basically completed so far, but in the long run... of course I don't model myself, so I cannot judge how much of a hassle it is to use these optimised techniques.

[PBGV103 729]

I was about to type a lengthy response, but then Google Chrome crashed.

Anyway, unlike SimFox I don't have the time or patience to model entire 50 floor buildings out of a single box, so that's one of the reasons I have so many objects in my scenes. Second is the fact that material ID randomizing scripts NEVER work for me, so I use the built in randomizer in the material editor which requires that each different sub-material be on different objects, not faces of the same object. This leads to me having 20000 separate objects for windows alone, not to mention all the pavers. But actually the trees tend to be the worst of the worst time wise. Anyway, since a single zoom 5 render of 345 park ave takes about 4 hrs, I think going from a system with 2 threads at 2.8GHz to one with 32 threads at 3.1GHz will significantly cut down on time.

And yes, I guess I am a hardware enthusiast to some degree, but the true enthusiast are out there building $10000+ computers, which is obviously out of my price range.

  Edited February 17, 2012 by PBGV103  

[PBGV103 729]

Unfortunately I haven't found a written list of suggested specs for a computer for use with 3DS Max. I did find the minimum specs, listed below, but anyone can find those on Autodesk's website. Just like video games, however, the minimum specs mean it will run, not run well. Some of my coworkers who have experience with architectural workstations mentioned extremely expensive systems with Quadro GPUs costing $1000-3000 each. Obviously I've gotten in over my head, and while I don't want to feel like I'm wasting my money on old/bad components, I also don't want this to end up costing $10K

Anyway, I was playing around with bump maps for a particular building I was considering working on. I have an excellent map, however, the results look...well you can see for yourself.

Lastly, here I changed a couple of the materials slightly. Tell me what you think.

[gutterclub 2,729]

Glad to see some pics and glad to see you still working.

The new material is an improvement in my opinion, just less sterile and clean and has more life to it...Great work as always

[Vlasky 1,803]

I see what you have tried to do here, but I don't think this is the way. Base texture seem to have gone too yellow, maybe you should have added just a little bit of yellow that wouldn't be much noticeable but rather suggest worn element. For that effect adding a bit of khaki and gray, imho, should do it.

[Aaron Graham 4,417]

Nice looking bump you have there. I prying to see a new building from you one day.

[PBGV103 729]

Well, on my laptop monitor (IPS) it looks more eggshell/off-white, not totally yellow; however, on my Samsung monitor (TN=horrible color reproduction), it looks yellow, but just about everything looks too yellow and/or green. In my case that's just a result of this 2.5 year old monitor being a piece of trash. I really want that Dell u3011 (S-IPS) which meets about 100% of the Adobe color space and 117% of the CIE 1976 color gamut (most TN monitors reach about 40%). The only drawback is it does not have a LED backlight, but the only similar monitor I've found with a LED backlight is from Samsung and costs $3500 where the Dell is only $1350.

Anyway, everything with that cement material on it is the same object. The material doesn't have a 1:1 bitmap (and no, I won't make one, you can if you want to spend 10hrs with gimp/photoshop) so I'm not sure why that front area looks slightly more yellow than the rest.

Also, can anyone guess which building the bump map test was for?

[Sgt Pepper 864]

I don't see the problem with the yellow. It has a faint hard to notice yellow hue but I think that gives more life to it.

It looks brilliant and done to me.

About what that test would be for..no idea? A museum in the Upper West/East Side? I wouldn't know.

[Vlasky 1,803]

Here I have desaturated it a couple of units, added a few of gray and lowered yellow a bit. See by yourself what looks better to you>

[Francis90b 748]

I'm in full support of Vlad's modifications.

[kellydale2003 2,276]

Loving the update Paul!

As for the tree problem, I noticed that SimFox had the same problem...

I'd certainly love for you to solve this problem, and I know you exported the BAT at least once already! (think you told me over Facebook)

But if you find a solution, definitely PM me! The solution Aaron Graham posted does seem to work, but at the expense of removing Mr. Physical Sky from the environment. And of course when you do that, you don't get those water reflections, or metals, or anything that reflects the sky. My best solution to this problem is to export the base, then export the rest separate and join them together in LE or PIM-x.

It's quite annoying, but it stills compromises the BASE reflections for Mr. Physical Sky. I do have a theory that a box behind, or the tree in a box with inherited visibility, but invisible to the camera might help reduce it. It also might change up the textures and gamma if the tree is in a box, but it may or may not be satisfactory. I'm working on a solution to the same problem!

Of course I just may export it for now, and have a fix for it later whenever there's a good working solution (not one that's just satisfactory).

, kellydale2003

edit: ps; that bump map is a beaut!

  Edited February 24, 2012 by kellydale2003  

[kellydale2003 2,276]

Sorry to double post but...

I just saw your post about the fountains... I've run into a similar problem! But of course, particles are oh so very small and aren't really worth processing on a scale of Simcity 4. Before I had my new computer, my 2gb laptop couldn't handle particles. How I got around this was forming a sphere like this...

Add a material to it, (preferably a bright white-blue to simulate the bubbles [because getting accurate bubbles in a fountain 120m away is not important}). **Don't forget a little bit of reflectivity, transparency, etc.

Then add a displacement map to it, I used this map, it works good. But it was initially for grass. I see you seem fluent in bump maps, displacement maps same and different in their own ways.

Feel free to create your own displacement map, I usually set this to a level of 2 in Arch & Design. I'm sure there are many possibilities to a better displacement map than this.

&

Of course the fountains sprays differ from the water itself. If you want to get more realistic, you'll have to create a custom texture with a bump or displacement map to simulate ripples from the fountain sprays. If you have multiple sprays in a set of water, you'll have to create a bigger texture or a seamless texture and UVW wrapped to your water geometry. Of course, after that (if you'd like)... CAUSTICS! You can simulate them with a texture at the bottom (note; have the water as a plane to avoid darkness if you want to fake caustics), or you can have the real thing generated in the scene. I now prefer the real thing since I got a 8gb ram baby now! The benefit of having RL caustics is that your night scene may benefit!

In order to get a better more defined effect, you can model a much more complicated 'bowling pin' type geometry from the sphere. But in all honesty, before HD, this is the closest someone is going to see it.

**Zoom 5**

HD doesn't even get this close...

As for that other beautiful fountain that Girafe posted, for long sprayed fountains like that or those Water fountain shows... I personally think that's the only time it's actually applicable. For your situation, a rouge ugly modelling from a sphere or pro-boolean things to simulate the flow of water on the stair looking fountains would be my best suggestion!

Hope that helped!

[Cockatoo 2,257]

As for the tree problem, I noticed that SimFox had the same problem...

The way I get around it to set the colour of the MR ground to a darkish green so that it roughly matches the colour of any trees I have near to the edge my the lot. Of course I have a ground plane in place when I do this so none of this green is reflected/ refracted anywhere, the only place it shows up is in the anti-aliasing. I used this method on the UN and was really happy with the results. Simple, but effective. It also helps to 'fill out' your trees if they're a little on the thin side too.

For your fountain idea, I think it's good. I'd combine it with particles for the best results, and alter the surface of the water to become more frantic the closer it is to a jet. I think that’s probably what SimFox did.

[PBGV103 729]

My problem is the fountain doesn't have jets. It's made of overflowing pools. Essentially I need a particle system that fills those pools, then overflows, making a bunch of water falls.

  Edited February 25, 2012 by PBGV103  

[Girafe 1,729]

what's the problem with the flora?

[kellydale2003 2,276]

My problem is the fountain does have jets. It's made of overflowing pools. Essentially I need a particle system that fills those pools, then overflows, making a bunch of water falls.

Your problem is that the fountain does have jets, or it doesn't? That sentence was a bit confusing! x)

And if you have a problem where you have a particle system that needs to fill up the pool, then overflow... I seriously hope you're not doing it with one Particle System! That maybe your problem, because there will be a lot of unnecessary particles generated that won't make up, or make very little of the scene.

You'll have to model the water that goes horizontal (to save rendering time), and the particle system that goes vertically (that flows down) will be the only part with the particle system.

You'll no doubt have to create multiple particle systems, but for each particle system, only have the minimal deflectors all attached to the same gravity. Minimize the deflector calculation with the particle systems just by having fewer of them! This means, every couple of stairs you will have to have a new set of particle systems and deflectors.

As for the particle generation themselves, I would create some fancy simple shapes as instanced geometry and put them at a bare minimum in generation! Why!?

Well you want to cut down on render times, and like Cockatoo suggested earlier... the combination of both will have an indefinitely better effect!

So model up the water with whatever geometry you use, use my little tutorial, and have the particle systems only participate minimally in the scene.

In all honesty, the only places I should see particle systems used (like I stated earlier) is kind of a spray (one with open air between the jet and end water drops, just like a water fountain show).

In this photo, the geometry modeled in my tutorial should be the water against the actual water fountain geometry, and the water droplets that part away from the water fountain structure should be the particle system(s).

Because filling up a pool with particles is useless and time consuming, faking it (or as Simfox says "Remember you are after illusion and not accurate.")... Unless you want to spend 3 hours rendering a tiny pool! (:

, kellydale2003

EDIT: ps; I really suggest the stairs of the fountain should be modelled out, and have a good displacement map with opacity, slight reflection, and low self-illumination. This will save you a lot of minutes in rendering time (which eventually add up to hours).

  Edited February 25, 2012 by kellydale2003  

[Girafe 1,729]

Flora element need more density, click right on foliage, property, MR, return black

You need to select your leaves too and scale them larger