[rendek]

Hi Guys,

I was out for a week and decided to render this sceen for the whole time. The model is from www.formfonts.com and I lit the scene with one of hyltom's LDR maps. I actually only used one of the 200*100 thumbnail size images which hyltom posted in his great WIP post and converted it into an mxi map:

http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... hp?t=19915

I hoped that it would reach a higher SL. I'm not sure why it only got to 20.83.

the stats:

original size: 2500*1875
S.L.: 20.83
time: 157 hours 23 minutes
benchmark: 78.96
(next S.L.: 6h47m)

Please comment! Thanks!

LDR background:

[glypticmax]

The one time I tried something similar with such a small res light map, I got a similar result. Although I stopped it after a couple of hours because I could see it wasn't going anywhere.
I used something similar at 1500x750 and it rendered as expected.
I now normally use HDR's and MXI's 3000 to 4000 x something (depending on the shape map I need) and have never see the stuck in molasses render speeds.
If I were you, I would either build the map in PS or something like Corel to get a larger jpg or tiff, or use Alien Skin's Blow Up to inscrease the resolution of what you have. I've done it both ways with success.
You can enlarge the res in PS, but I haven't used it as Blow Up is so good.
And I'm lazy.
The other thing could be you have something in your set up that is a time sink. Material settings, scale or something else.
But the tiny res of your light map stands out from the information you posted.

[hyltom]

I don't know if the size of the LDR can have any incidence on your result but as Glyptimax said, i will definitely used a bigger one.
Also, don't care too much about the SL. Some picture can look really great at SL 14 and there is no use to go further.

The most probable reason why your SL is so low after all this time is that you used an emitter in you scene (the red part). Basically, if you used HDR or LDR and you want to get fast rendering, don't used any emitter. As i said in one of my post, using even an tiny emitter (not perceptible) will decrease by 2 or 3 the benchmark number and so the rendering time. NL has some optimization work to do with the emitter i think. How come the HDR can be much faster than a simple emitter?

These are my personal thought. I' m not an expert so i can be wrong.

[rendek]

glypticmax, hyltom,

Thanks a lot for your great comments!! have any of you had any good experience using mxis as mapped light sources (through the material settings)? I was thinking about trying that too...

[glypticmax]

I only have used HDR's or MXI for global lighting or applied to emitters for a soft box look.
Both work fine.
I would never work with anything below 1500 x750. Particularly if I were working with rough transparent materials. My simple tests suggest 3000-4000 x X saves time. I did one I posted earlier and cut render time from 20+ hour to 7 for same SL. The only difference being res of the HDR.

[Hervé]

glypticmax, hyltom,

Thanks a lot for your great comments!! have any of you had any good experience using mxis as mapped light sources (through the material settings)? I was thinking about trying that too...

http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... hp?t=18228

[rendek]

oh, thanks Hervé!! Now I remember reading this back then...it's easy to forget these good posts...