Send us your record-breaking works according to the categories inside. We will post them if a record is broken.
User avatar
By Tyrone Marshall
#40007
FalconKing here is an explanation of the two numbers:

Basically in this example there are numbers for points and polygons and then a second number for the same things in brackets. The number without brackets is the count of all objects, and splines that are still in their parametric state which means that the number is 0 for these objects.

The second number is the count if these objects where turned into point/polygon objects (no longer parametric but real 3d objects not math forumlae). So the second number is your actual point and polygon weight count for the scene.
User avatar
By Kabe
#41464
Tyrone's explanation is completely correct. As soon as we have a stable Mac beta, I'll check if the triangle count is not even higher.

Kabe
By InTheCity
#47614
Shame, that scene could have been around 200'000 and
would have worked the same way

as for maxwell pushing the polygon bar
fair enough

but as for practical scene sizes
this is far too heavy
User avatar
By Tyrone Marshall
#47769
Kabe wrote:Tyrone's explanation is completely correct. As soon as we have a stable Mac beta, I'll check if the triangle count is not even higher.

Kabe
Kabe any update on the actual number of triangles?

All you would have to do is just run a quick voxelisation run with Maxwell, we just need the report of triangles as determined by Maxwell Render. I am sure this scene is most likely in the 9 to 10 million triangles range.
User avatar
By Kabe
#49854
InTheCity wrote:Shame, that scene could have been around 200'000 and would have worked the same way

as for maxwell pushing the polygon bar
fair enough
but as for practical scene sizes
this is far too heavy
200 K? I'm confident that this is a pretty wild assumption considered the sheer number of pillars and their cuts with curved surfaces in this building. How many polygons had the house setup that you have posted http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4225?

Could it be done with fewer polygons? Certainly, but firstly this is a CAD model, and it was certainly not modeled for render efficiency. Secondly model is the complete building, not just the interior.

Cheers

Kabe
User avatar
By Kabe
#49868
:idea: Interesting enough, the polygon count in Maxwell is less than in Cinema.

In Maxwell the scene has a "meager" 5.07 MTriangles, I'm not shure if the difference is due to eliminated or missing objects or wrong counting in Cinema - it's not easy to recount literally thousands of objects :D

So much for breaking the record (...with a model that I did not myself, to stress that another time!)

Kabe
Let's talk about Maxwell 5.2

well to put things short I believe (after 15 year[…]

Materials translucent with V5.1

Well, the problems can be in the chair, the monito[…]

hardware question :)

That’s a point to resolve fast. Other rend[…]

New podcast - CG Talks

Hey guys! We have just finished the second season[…]