Filmer 3D for Hitfilm owmycgi.net : Design and VFX.

1353638404178

Comments

  • spydurhank
    spydurhank Posts: 3,193 Expert

    @FlyingBanana78

    I'm using the Mike Pan BMW scene for the videos that I post on YouTube, but I've also used the other Blender Benchmarks that are out there like the Classroom scene, Fishy Cat, Koro, Pabellon Barcelona and Victor.

    For the bmw scene on the Blender 2.80.0 Beta, I lowered the render and aa sample count by 500 samples to speed it up as it is very slow to render.

    For the bmw scene on my Blender build, I raise the render and aa sample count by 500 samples, add denoising and an hdri envirnment map which technically add to render times. My build still rendered faster than the 2.80.0 BETA.

    On my machine, my slow 2.6ghz processors create a massive bottleneck as they can't keep up very well with my GPUs. So I'm pretty interested in how everyones 4.0ghz processors will keep up with your GPUs.

    I haven't calculated a percentage to see how much faster my build is vs the 2.80.0 beta but without using any tricks like denoising or aa sampling, I roughly get 10 to 20 seconds faster render times with only GPUs and roughly gain another 10 to 15 seconds render times with cpu + gpu. AMD cards are roughly 20 seconds slower than my Nvidia 980s. Using denoising and aa samples I get roughly about 2x to 3x faster render times. You can gain even more speed by outputting render passes rather than a single beauty pass.  

    I've found another way to gain I think another 20%-ish speedup in render times for GPUs but it is a bit more complicated to add to Blender, well it is complicated for me because I've just started learning how to code all this stuff but I will apply this code to my Blender build as soon as I can set the time aside.  

    There are no CPU speed ups in my code so you're stuck with however fast your cpu is but the more GPUs with more cuda cores / cores that you have, the faster your renders will be. So a 6gig or 8gig video card which I'm assuming have more cuda cores than a 4gig gtx 970 add a 3.0ghz or 4.0ghz processor and you're gonna fly through your renders.        

    @Triem23 No worries, it'll be good to see how laptops do. 

  • tddavis
    tddavis Posts: 5,171 Expert

    @spydurhank I went and found the benchmark zip you mentioned just for fun and got some strange results:

    BMW using 2.8 for GPU project yielded:  15:23.30 /Mem 142.05M /Peak 157.07M

    but using the CPU project:                                 12:42.16 /Mem 147.05M/Peak 142.32M

    and for sh*ts & giggles I changed the color to a nice deep blue not expecting any change but:

                                                                                                12:28.52 /Mem 142.05/ Peak 142.32M

    It is the most photoreal image I have ever rendered though which tells me 2 things: I still have no clue about texturing and lighting and I don't think my computer is configured correctly to use the GPU properly??

  • spydurhank
    spydurhank Posts: 3,193 Expert

    We can take a look at stuff to help improve all of our renders to make em' pretty and not just render fast. 

    Your 4.0ghz processor cores are pretty fast, almost 3 minutes faster than your GPU, wow! testing your machine is gonna be nice. I'm doing some last minute coding so you guys get the fastest version possible. 

    Could you post the image here? I'd love to see it because you did a very cool thing, you tweaked a small thing like color and got something which sounds like an amazing render. I love it when something simple gets you something amazing. It should always be that simple. :)

    We can talk more as we progress but I'm taking a 7 minute smoke break boss. :) 

  • tddavis
    tddavis Posts: 5,171 Expert

    @spydurhank I wasn't saving the renders  but I went back and did it again and got a time of 12:18.21 same Mem though. I wonder if not selecting the exact same shade of blue could make a difference?

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/jjxubmg764htm6z/blue BMW.png?dl=0

    I never been a car fanatic, but I think it looks better in blue.

  • spydurhank
    spydurhank Posts: 3,193 Expert

    Wow, that looks really, really good. :)

  • Triem23
    Triem23 Posts: 20,511 Ambassador

    @tddavis daaaaaamn, Terry, that's a sweet beauty shot. 

  • tddavis
    tddavis Posts: 5,171 Expert

    Thanks, guys.  Wish I had something to do with it :(  That is the level of realism I hope to one day be able to create with my little ditties...

  • GrayMotion
    GrayMotion Posts: 1,613 Enthusiast
    edited January 2019

    I thought I'd give the BMW render ago but bare with me, first time using 2.8 .... I have a great render (I think) but my times are somewhat different than Terry's. Not sure about his render specs though.

    Image size - 1920x1080
    Samples -  31 squared - 911AA
    Tiles - 64
    Denoise - Radius 25

    Supported/CPU --> 18:41:62/  Mem 216.05M/Peak 216.05M

    Supported/GPU --> 5:30:59/  Mem 142.05M/Peak 142.05M

    Definitely noticed that tile sizes between 32 and 128 works much better than 256 or 512 with v2.8 ? Just the opposite of v2.79 and lower. Also not sure about the options in user settings for using both CPU and CUDA GPU together for render?? Both CPU and GPU are check marked but I don't see them working together?? All in good time I suppose. Looking forward to beta testing your build  Frank.

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hV9WikvEH0gKiiavpoxEa_CTeKxuQXtz/view?usp=sharing

    Edit: Tried to go purple but it looks like I ink dropped Terry's blue. SBT.



  • tddavis
    tddavis Posts: 5,171 Expert

    @GrayMotion Are your render specs the default for the file?  I left settings as is except when I tweaked it from orange to blue.  Better blue, right? But the lights are more visible when it's orange I've noticed.  And I see you got a much better GPU time than I did.  I really have to look into those Nvidia settings to see what I haven't done right.

  • GrayMotion
    GrayMotion Posts: 1,613 Enthusiast
    edited January 2019

    Yea...Blue (dark body color) covers up the paint nick on the drivers door :-)

    I reopened stock blend.  It looks like 1920x1080 (render at 50%), tiles 256, samples 35 squared to 1225AA, Denoise radius 8. Thanks for the slap on the head Terry. Evidently I needed it. Big difference in the CPU render time...

    Updated Results:

    Supported/CPU --> 7:34:84 /  Mem 208M/Peak 208M
    Supported/GPU --> 8:09:84/  Mem 142.05M/Peak 142.05M

    **As for the Nvidia settings..I have nothing..out of the box and plugged in. I do know that in the Cycles engine the higher tile the faster the render (256-512) BUT I see now that lower tiles appear to give faster renders in 2.8 so I'd start there with the tweaking.  Something else...Denoise on samples above 700 or so is over kill. It appears that the render quality is usually 99.9999% at 700 samples with Denoise...over that everything is overhead and there is no noticeable change in quality - my experience anyhow.


  • FlyingBanana78
    FlyingBanana78 Posts: 497 Enthusiast
    edited January 2019

    @spydurhank

    Ok I have cpu and gpu rendered out on both the laptop and the desktop. I am just opening the respective file as per the render GPU/CPU and hitting F12.  Also I had a brain cloud the cpu in the desktop is an i7-6700 3.4 up to 4.0ghz 8M cache ... guess it is time for an upgrade :)

    CPU Time: 16:40.11   |  Mem:144.77M, Peak: 144.90M

    GPU Time: 11:31.00   | Mem:142.06M, Peak: 142.06M

    Desktop Benchmark Times as follows. I also rendered the GPU at 3 different tile sizes. 

    CPU Time: 07:02.89   |  Mem:144.77M, Peak: 145.00M

    GPU Time: 08:38.10   | Mem:142.06M, Peak: 142.06M   *Original File 256x256 Tiles*

    GPU Time: 03:15.21   | Mem:142.06M, Peak: 142.06M    * 128x128 Tiles*

    GPU Time: 02:11.33   | Mem:142.06M, Peak: 142.06M    * 64x64 Tiles*

  • tddavis
    tddavis Posts: 5,171 Expert
    edited January 2019

    @FlyingBanana78 That's exactly how I did on mine too.  What I find interesting is the Mem & Peak seems pretty close to the same on all our systems with the base settings even though time varies... at least on the GPUs.

    @GrayMotion Where do you find the denoise radius?  I looked in the usual spot and denoising isn't checked on when I open it up.

  • GrayMotion
    GrayMotion Posts: 1,613 Enthusiast
    edited January 2019

    I went back as I didn't follow instruction - I loaded the CPU file and then just change to GPU render. That was wrong...I should have loaded the correct file for each test as @FlyingBanana78 made clear for me. I made no changes...loaded and hit F12 to render

    So...cluttering Frank's pages up here with useless information:

    Supported/CPU - 6:04:29
    Experimental/GPU - 7:41:23

    The memory usage didn't change...

    @tddavis - see above for my mistake. The radius of Denoise can be changed by clicking the dropdown...it defaults to 8. And you're right..it was NOT selected. My bad on the render. Sorry for the confusion  :-(

  • spydurhank
    spydurhank Posts: 3,193 Expert

    There was a bug fix update this morning for Blender 2.80.0 Beta so I'm gonna apply my changes to it real quick and build it, then do a quick video for the BETA testers and the actual Blender build should be up today for you guys to download, barring inclement weather. Yup, it is Florida and lightning storms just appear whenever they want. 

     

  • FilmSensei
    FilmSensei Posts: 3,113 Expert

    @spydurhank I am looking forward to it. I won't be able to see what you are doing just yet. However my work in Colorado is now complete, so I am now traveling to my home in Virginia over the next three days. Therefore I should be back in the swing of things starting on Sunday!

    On a side note, I am frustrated getting 2.8 to work properly on my travelling laptop. It does not display correctly, and I cannot fix it. I am hopeful that I will not have this problem on my main computer at home. I could only find one other person who has had the same problem that I have, and he has not been able to fix it either.

    Good luck on the build today!

  • spydurhank
    spydurhank Posts: 3,193 Expert

    Thanks @FilmSensei , things should go smoothly. :)

    Yeah the weather is looking pretty mean right now.

     

  • spydurhank
    spydurhank Posts: 3,193 Expert

    Whoa, just skimmed through the updated Blender source files. Looks like a bunch of bug fixes and a ton of other changes, I should have something ready in an hour or so. :)

  • tddavis
    tddavis Posts: 5,171 Expert

     @spydurhank Since you mentioned there was a bug fixed release I went and got it and ran the BMW again and while Mem didn't change more than superficially the render time on the GPU dropped about 13 secs and the CPU about 3secs.  Just for anecdotal info...

  • spydurhank
    spydurhank Posts: 3,193 Expert

    @tddavis ,

    Thanks, I had to wait for weather to pass as there was lightning, which turned into a long nap, but I just got everything ported with the updated 2.80.0 master and need to run a build, I will then screencap in a few minutes after some coffee. :) If you got a speed up, I'm thinking that I will too. :)

     

  • FlyingBanana78
    FlyingBanana78 Posts: 497 Enthusiast

    Yeah good ole Florida. Been off and on since last night. Still gray out like it isn't wanting to leave. I noticed the update as well but didn't want to risk trying to get a render in between lightning strikes. If it stays calm long enough I will test the render out on the latest build/bug fixes.

  • spydurhank
    spydurhank Posts: 3,193 Expert

    Here is a quick video with the latest bug fixes and bench tests for the Beta testers. Speed test was pretty satisfying. :) 

     

    Filmer beta is available for download over in my shop  https://www.owmycgi.net/shop

    Do not purchase unless you want to contribute to further development.

    Beta testers, send me your emails and I'll reply with a free download coupon code.

    Greg, I already sent you and email. :)

     

    Looking forward to your bench tests. Later,

     

    Frank

  • spydurhank
    spydurhank Posts: 3,193 Expert

    Beta testers, make sure I get your email please. :) 

  • tddavis
    tddavis Posts: 5,171 Expert

    @spydurhank Big change!!

    1st pass with GPU BMW with your build:

    11:57.38 minutes   Mem 142.05M  Peak 142.13M in a nice Red...I'd buy this one with lottery money :)

    A Things of Beauty

    Full specs for Render with the just released Blender 2.8 Beta  GPU with Bug fixes:

    15:23.89 minutes Mem 142.05M  Peak 157.07M in @GrayMotion 's pretty purple:

    Passion Purple

    Cut about 3.5 minutes (ish) minutes.  I'm impressed with your Blender mastery.  You find time to throw together a Blend Udemy (or anywhere) course and I'll be there with bells on, man!

  • FlyingBanana78
    FlyingBanana78 Posts: 497 Enthusiast
    edited January 2019

    @spydurhank,

         I have done a rendering of cpu and gpu on the laptop, going to wait till tomorrow to put it on the desktop as well and render out the scene. I will post the results tomorrow . I did get a cuda error on the laptop with the GPU file rendering .

    This is the laptop GPU render results, I tried lowering the tile size and it still gave the same error.

    2.8 Blender Build GPU Time: 11:31.00   | Mem:142.06M, Peak: 142.06M

    https://imgur.com/dcygZLH

     

    Here is the CPU results....

    2.8 Blender Build CPU Time: 16:40.11   |  Mem:144.77M, Peak: 144.90M

    2.8 Filmer Build CPU Time: 15:34.02   |  Mem:144.77, Peak: 144.81M

    https://imgur.com/eHW1LEO

     

    And just for giggles I put my second ever car model through to see how an unnecessarily high poly model would do.  And if curious this is the times between all three, 2.79, 8, and Filmer 

    Filmer 16:59.34
    2.79 23:17.86
    2.8 beta 25:50.21

    https://imgur.com/fql2yK1

  • GrayMotion
    GrayMotion Posts: 1,613 Enthusiast
    edited January 2019

    Ok then...... GPU results only for the moment Frank

    Blender Beta 2.80 - 2:25.20

    Filmer Beta - 1:21.14

    Video showing results for 128, 64 and 32 tiles in 2.80 Beta:

  • spydurhank
    spydurhank Posts: 3,193 Expert

    Wow guys!!! 

    I'm so glad that it worked on most of your systems.

    @FlyingBanana78 I think your NVIDIA® GeForce® MX150 (2 GB GDDR5 dedicated) in your laptop is underpowered at 2gigs, but I don't really know for sure because I don't own a laptop to test Filmer-beta in, so maybe we can wait a bit for @Triem23 to chime in with his results. You guys can email me at [email protected] or [email protected] Just tag your email title Filmer-Beta so that I can get you the FREE download link, wait is it alright to leave my email here? I'm sorry that it is your laptop machine that got the Cuda error but at least we know that there is 4gig graphics card requirement to use Filmer. I'll update info on my site, but lets wait till @Triem23 can let us know how things go on his laptop.

    You guys did fantastic with trying out varying tile sizes for Blender 2.80.0 BETA to see how it stands up to Filmer Beta.

    @tddavis , Thank you for everything. :) You've got a magic touch there, you finesse something as simple as a color and you not only get a couple of beautiful images but you also get a faster render time from that color change. Brilliant, good eye and good instincts. :)  

    @FlyingBanana78 , your cpu is a rendering beast. And your high poly car looks amazing.

    @GrayMotion , Awesome video and again, great job with showing the different tile sizes for Blender 2.80.0 BETA.

     I'll link here every time there is any kind of update, big or small, you guys will get it right away. Just waiting for @FilmSensei to make it home safe and Triem23.   

    Thank you again guys for taking your personal time to help me test Filmer. You guys ROCK. :) 

  • FilmSensei
    FilmSensei Posts: 3,113 Expert

    @spydurhank I'll be home tomorrow night, so I should get to it on Sunday.

  • spydurhank
    spydurhank Posts: 3,193 Expert

    @FilmSensei , Awesome and looking forward to it. :)

  • spydurhank
    spydurhank Posts: 3,193 Expert

    Here's a quick video review of the beta tester benchmarks, I show off all of  your beautiful renders and link to @GrayMotion video plus show a thing or two that I missed in the last video. 

    One quick thing. If you purchase Filmer or donate to the future development of Filmer, you'll on request have access to Filmers source code which you can do with as you please with no restrictions at all.

    This means you can do things that folks who contribute with their time and money won't care for because it would take away from future development. You can do things like give it away, modify, alter and enhance the code if you're able... worst case, you can even attempt to resell it yourself if you've got the nerve. I'm not here to stop anyone or judge them from doing whatever they're gonna do, Why? Because when I say no restrictions, I mean absolutely no restrictions. I'm here to simply create art and not to fight or argue about theft or greed with Pirates. Pirates are gonna Pirate so just let them Pirate.    

  • tddavis
    tddavis Posts: 5,171 Expert
    edited January 2019

    To the other BETA testers of @spydurhank 's custom Blend,

    I decided to try the Classroom benchmark from Blender today with these results:

    2.8 latest release GPU render: Time: 36:32.98 minutes MEM: 298.68M PEAK: 410.70M

    Filmer Build GPU render: Time: 34:21.14 minutes MEM: 353.19M PEAK: 304.95M

    A fairly consistent several minute improvement on my machine so far.

    Just did Fishy_Cat as well using Frame 8 to get maximum water droplets in frame and these results are unbelievable and definitely throw my curve in a tizzy:

    2.8 latest release GPU render: Time: 35:22.89 minutes MEM: 385.79M PEAK: 399.87M

    Filmer Build GPU render: Time: 17:14.58 minutes MEM: 385.79M PEAK: 385.87M

    The difference is so jarring that I rendered with Filmer again to double check that time!

    Filmer Redo  GPU Render: 17:18.31 minutes with the same MEM allocations as before. I'm not sure why there was as slight difference in time as everything was equal with the system unless it happened to be a background process I'm not aware about.

     Edit:  Ok, I have egg on my face!  Frank asked me to post a render of the classroom and since I hadn't saved it I went back to re render with the Filmer build.  I also had watched the video @GrayMotion put out and saw a screen in the preferences I had never visited; long story shot all my GPU times are bogus as I had Cycles render device to NONE and wasn't using my GPU at all apparently.  The new time on the classroom scene dropped 30 minute!!! Sorry for filling up your thread with useless info, Spydurhank.

    Filmer Build GPU render: Time: 6:36.43 minutes MEM: 353.35M PEAK: 353.57M after turning on CUDA   I've got a lot of re rendering to do...

    Classroom

This discussion has been closed.