Jim_Allen

I have been experimenting with RW and Rad for rendering light Q's for stage productions. It seems that the time to render with Rad isn't worth it as I like RW rendering better. Maybe it is because I don't understand Rad but these are an example of a Q rendered. RW took about 45 SECONDS and Rad took 1 1/2 hours. Some input, suggestions, and your thoughts about this are welcomed. Jim First photo is RW and second is Rad

Dave, I have a couple of renderings, RW vs RAD, and wanted to upload them for some reaction. As I understand it one needs a web page to be able to upload pics?? I am in a debate about the look of RW vs RAD, especially as RAD takes 1 1/2 hours to render a pic that RW does in 45 seconds, and I don't think Rad looks as good. Wanted some opinions. Thanks, Jim

I like the orginal - looks more real, except the red really pops. Jim

No problems running VW & RW

I just bought a new laptop dual core and love it. I don't know about comparing speed to a desktop, my old desktop wasn't a dual,but I would think a laptop would be as fast as a desktop configured the same.I expect that the vid card would affect RW when regenreating the image?? Jim

PS I have't been able to get a Rad rendering that compares to the renderworks, as I have removed everything but the floor, one figure, and two lights with gobos to get a Rad rendering in under an hour. If I use the full Q with stage walls, 3 figures, 4 lights with gobos,and 6 backlights it ties up my computer for so long I just force close it so I can do other work. I will set one up tonight and let it work after I go to sleep and see what I get. Jim

Kevin, Will do. I was looking to see what other LDs are doing. The responses I get on the RW BB are often people that don't understand theatre. Christiaan, Will check it out Jim

I have been playing around with the different rendering methods and was wondering if my reaction - that Rad takes too much time and doesn't look that much better than RenderWorks - is acurate. I have had to reduce the number of lights and objects on stage so much to get Rad to render in any reasonable time frame - less than 1hr. I have tried several different settings for Rad and if I reduce them to get good time I don't see enough of a difference in the look of my Q, actually it look less accurate than the Q in RenderWorks. It would take days to render a bunch of Qs with Rad - and maybe that is the question - is Rad what I want to use? What do others use? Any thoughts or suggestions? Jim

Dave, Do you mean update not release?? I am assuming it will not cost additional to get bug fixes?

got it - worked with a new download of the installer. Thanks Jim

I searched my computer and could not find the file. How do I request a disk or can I re-download the update from NNA? I looked for it on the web site and could not find it. Firewall was off for the install thanks Jim

Katie, I am trying to update to 12.0.1 - got a new computer. Installed 12 and tried the update. It runs for a while then I get an error message that starts with C:documents and settings.... and ends with 12\nnaoutput.txt. I am connected to the internet. Any ideas on what is going on?? Thanks Jim Allen XP PRO dual core T2600 @ 2.16GHx 1G RAM

Ok. thanks jim

I created a plot and afterwards, when I started to do some rendering, I realized I hadn't set the Z height for the instruments and electrics. Is there a way to do a global Z change? If I select a whole electric "properties" and "object info" are grayed out.

Thanks Kevin, Jeeze - losing a mind is a terrible thing, but mine seems to get lost daily - I was looking in the Manual.... V11 Got it I got everything to work but my focus points appear as floating discs in the rendering - they are set a 5' - is there a way to make them disappear?

OOPS wrong discussion area

For some reason I cannot find the gobo insertion tool in my Spotlight pallet anymore?? How do I get it back? Jim

For some reason I cannot find the gobo insertion tool in my Spotlight pallet any more?? How do I get it back? Jim VW 12.0.1 WinXP

Thanks Will take a look at the wood texture. I went into edit and changed the image size to 8' and it worked on the flat that was 4'x8' I then applied it to a small 2'x3' flat and the floor - it worked everytime. the floor repeated the pattern over and over so I assume it it tileing the image?? The smaller flat had just a portion of the image. interesting Need to play with this some more to see how to make it work the best. Too bad the program can't just adjust the image to fit the size of the surface it is being applied to - or - have the option to do it - like the "CTRL 4 " command fit to window. Now some more weirdness. I went back to re-look at my image and the preview window of my flames is totally wierd - so i changed the image size to 6" - which is what the wood texture is, and I see only a portion of my flames - I changed it to 1" and I see all the flames. This is really strange. thanks for all the ideas so far any additional insight into the issue is alway appreciated as i continue to walk the path of learning Jim

Katie, So you mean I have to reasize the image for each object I apply it to?? How come I can apply a wood texture to a stage floor and a flat and get the same results? In Edit it shows the image size as 1" Thanks Jim

Hey Katie, The image is a picture of flames. When applied to my flat it looks like med & dark brown diagonal lines. My guess is that I don't understand the import new texture process. The RenderWorks manual is really confusing about the process. thanks for the help. Jim

I am having a problem a creating and applying a texture to a flat. I took a JPG and did the conversion to PNG and did the import texture process. It shows up in the resouse pallet but when I apply it to a flat it doesn't look like the orginal image. I know this isn't really a spotlight issue but does any one have an idea??

Since they re-did the Tech Board, I have noticed that there is no moderator listed for Spotlight. Kevin are you still with us?

You can check out the Renderworks listings. They have had a strand about speed and processors. Dual core VS hyperthreading. From what I got out of it - basically the dual cores work faster for rendering. Hyperthreading isn't as good over all. At the end of the month I am buying a new computer with dual core so I will see how much faster it is than what I have now AMD 64 - 2800+ 1.8 GHz - 512 MG RAM - PA extension

Pat, I agree that LW is not always needed. I have used other methods for paperwork - starting back with Mini-Cad and Excel :-) I worked with Mini-Cad in the 90's providing input on what was needed for a lighting CAD program. Back then I lobbied for a paperwork program that was more flexable and useable - but Frank Brault and the others kept saying they were in the CAD business and not paperwork, so I started using LW and haven't even looked at the VW paperwork since then. Maybe they will/are changing their minds about developing the paperwork programs. Kevin want to weight in on this??? Jim