Maximum render size?

slojoslojo Posts: 0
edited December 1969 in Bryce Discussion

Folks, hoping someone can tell me what the maximum render size is for Bryce 7 Pro. When I try to render an image at 8000 x 4000, the width reverts to 4000, no matter what type I select in the Document setup window. I can get the height to 8000, but not the width.

I thought increasing the pixels per inch (dpi in Bryce) to 144 would suffice, and I could then rescale in Photoshop, but the image comes over (from Render to Disk) as 72 dpi, regardless of the dpi I enter. Just entering 8000 x 4000 in Render to Disk gives me an HDR of two 4000 x 2000 images side by side, which is not very useful.

I am hopeful that it's my ignorance of Bryce 7 and not a limitation of the application. I've haven't used Bryce since Bryce 4, and I used to get nice images from that.

Regards,
Rube )

Comments

  • David BrinnenDavid Brinnen Posts: 2,837
    edited December 1969

    Max width in document setup is 4000 - you can have more height. Here is a way of getting larger images http://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/4020/

    Render to disc offers a potential solution - but it can be a bit buggy at times. Don't pay any attention to dpi this is an arbitrary setting for printers. Only interest yourself in pixels x pixels.

    The other thing is, ask yourself why you need such a large resolution image. 4000 wide is a lot of pixels. If for printing, perform tests to determine what is the optimum pixel to dot conversion rate. 1:1 would be unusual since few printers can achieve RGB 255,255,255 colour resolution in one dot.

  • HoroHoro Posts: 4,274
    edited December 1969

    @slojo - what is the target of your render that you want to render larger than 4000 pixels? I render 1600 x 1200 for a photographic print 10.7 x 8 inches.

  • slojoslojo Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    Mr. Brinnen -
    Yes! That is it exactly. Would you believe it? I decided to get back into Bryce because 1) I once enjoyed playing around with it, and 2) because i started looking at your tutorials. I had gotten to "Create a Lake in a Landscape" and after reading your post see that a few more down the list (on the Bryce Tutorial site) is "Using Pan V and Pan H for LARGE RENDERS" - that was too funny. Pan V and H seem reasonable, as does using Pan 360. That was precisely what I was hoping to find. I ran a few tests before we lost power here in Carolina - bad storms, tornadic activity, and such. Power came on a little while ago. Anyway, stitching together the pieces would seem to be the best approach for what I need.

    Horo (and Mr. B) - I want to use them for the inside of a large sphere for IDL work. Right now, the low resolution images I'm using invariably have noticeable pixelation. I can - and have - mitigated that by using a gaussian blur, but I prefer not to do that. I prefer better definition from the source. Then it dawned on me... I have Bryce! Why not use it, and customize my own environment for use as a pseudo-HDRI image? Should work. So, I am glad to find a workable solution. I hope to purchase a couple of the Cloudscapes to help me along, so that as I learn volumetrics, I can refer to (or alter) those to start with. Well, my wife is getting dinner ready, and I'd better get off the computer if I know what's good for me.

    P.S. - I used to be in publishing. Actually, believe it or not, 144 dpi is a workable print resolution for most print houses (banners, generic posters). For images, usually 300 dpi would be a minimum. For art posters, anything lower than 600 dpi creates too many artifacts and often does not do justice to the artist's intent. (Then again, 600 dpi and up is a lot of ink!) Of course, there are actually artists now who use low resolution as part of their artistic intent to begin with, so there you go.

    Regards,
    Rube (slojo)

  • HoroHoro Posts: 4,274
    edited December 1969

    @slojo - thank you for sharing your knowledge about the preferred printer resolutions for different images.

  • David BrinnenDavid Brinnen Posts: 2,837
    edited December 1969

    Slojo, I don't quite follow what you are doing. But it does sound interesting! I will help you if I can - and probably better when I get a grip on what you are trying to achieve. (Maybe I have not yet consumed enough coffee to be able to think yet).

    I'm not saying you should get them, but you should be aware we (Horo and I) have created tools to turn entire scenes into both HDRI and Longitude Latitude projections, natively in Bryce. This is also possible using external software for conversions such as HDRshop, but the process is involved - Horo provides free tutorials for this also - if you have the time.

    Otherwise,

    Scene Converter

    Uses inherent Bryce optics to convert entire scenes into angular maps (the process is not perfect - but within tolerances for most applications and much easier than going the - 6 cube face render + cube to cross + HDRshop/transformation - route).

    Spherical Mapper

    Uses inherent Bryce optics to spherically map the entire scene. Again this can be performed perfectly via - 6 cube face render + cube to cross + HDRshop/transformation - route).

    Both these I've used to save myself a lot of time, mostly for testing, because I often have questions in my mind such as, I wonder what kind of light this scene would provide? Or how can I wrap this texture around that object?

  • slojoslojo Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    Horo, while I appreciate your thanks, I'm not sure I would characterize my information as the "preferred" printer resolutions, because each shop certainly has its own preferences for its clients - my numbers were merely experience driven. ;-)

    Mr. Brinnen - my usage would simply be for an environment sphere, which would of course use an HDR image to generate the IBL data for lighting the scene (and of course, the radiance data as well). One sphere I use has the capability to use images that are 22,000 x 11,000. So, depending the focal length of the camera I use for a scene in whatever application I am going to use, that background will look blurry or not depending on the native resolution of the image. Sometimes I will use the HDR image simply for the IBL light and use a hi-res jpeg of this same image as a background behind the scene (with light passthrough enabled) to eliminate that blurriness (or pixelation). I've looked at HDRShop before, but $199 is a bit much for what I need it to do. Your stitch solution using Pan was much more elegant to me, certainly much less expensive, and for me about as clever an approach to just about -anything- I have seen in a long time. Sometimes I will add fill lights into scenes for indirect lighting at lower intensities and sometimes not, making use of both IBL and IDL. With your solutions, I think it will afford me better flexibility in how my renders are approached... plus, I get to start using Bryce again.

    I truly thank you gentlemen for your expertise.

    Regards,
    Rube (slojo)

  • David BrinnenDavid Brinnen Posts: 2,837
    edited December 1969

    I see...

    Well, you are welcome, of course. And if you get stuck, just give us a nudge. If I have the time spare I will certainly help if I can.

    Cheers,

    David.

  • slojoslojo Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    I see...

    Well, you are welcome, of course. And if you get stuck, just give us a nudge. If I have the time spare I will certainly help if I can.

    Cheers,

    David.

    David -
    Oh, dear - if I get stuck? I imagine that will occur frequently as I get back into Bryce - you may regret that offer once I become a pest! By the way, I just purchased the Cloudscapes 6 Example 2 and DTE Terrain 4 and thank you and Horo for making those. I really should have bought them when they were on sell, but they are still reasonably priced, so what the heck. Your help already has more than covered the price, for which I thank you again.

    Regards,
    Rube

  • HoroHoro Posts: 4,274
    edited December 1969

    slojo said:
    Horo, while I appreciate your thanks, I'm not sure I would characterize my information as the "preferred" printer resolutions, because each shop certainly has its own preferences for its clients - my numbers were merely experience driven. ;-)

    Yes, that was, what I meant: experience. I'm very well aware that there are differences with the print shops. My experience is with prints on photo paper and I found 150 pixels per inch (or as they call it 150 lines per inch) giving the most satisfactory results.

    And thank you for using our products.

  • slojoslojo Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    Horo, happy to use the products. Lines per inch - I haven't heard anyone use that term in a good long while! Moved on to telecommunications from the print world many years ago. So, my route has been from dpi to DTMF to ppi. I remember when wireless and VoIP were brand-new terms. Those were fun days, and I hope the virtual world will prove as enlightening. It has so far!

    Regards,
    Rube

  • HoroHoro Posts: 4,274
    edited December 1969

    Rube, I got that from the head lab of Kodak in my country in the 1990s when I wrote a textbook about CCD astro cameras. Poor chaps, I've called them many times and asked questions for hours. I do remember ppi. I've been in telecoms since 1974 (was in Radar before). We've started with G.703 and now everything is IP. I remember the time when I couldn't pronounce Ethernet. And my first computer had 1 KB of RAM. Took a while until I hit the wall.

  • slojoslojo Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    Horo said:
    I remember the time when I couldn't pronounce Ethernet. And my first computer had 1 KB of RAM. Took a while until I hit the wall.

    Horo, my oh my, I've got tears in my eyes from laughing so hard! Ethernet! Ha ha ha ha ha. I can't begin to tell you the words I managed to mispronounce (mangled, actually) when I got into telecommunications. The acronyms drove me crazy.

    As for me, I wasn't so brave. I waited until computers were beefed up considerably, and finally got one when they had 512K of RAM. One K of RAM, that is incredible.

    Have a great evening, Horo,
    Regards,
    Rube

  • LordHardDrivenLordHardDriven Posts: 917
    edited December 1969

    slojo said:
    Horo said:
    I remember the time when I couldn't pronounce Ethernet. And my first computer had 1 KB of RAM. Took a while until I hit the wall.

    Horo, my oh my, I've got tears in my eyes from laughing so hard! Ethernet! Ha ha ha ha ha. I can't begin to tell you the words I managed to mispronounce (mangled, actually) when I got into telecommunications. The acronyms drove me crazy.

    As for me, I wasn't so brave. I waited until computers were beefed up considerably, and finally got one when they had 512K of RAM. One K of RAM, that is incredible.

    Have a great evening, Horo,
    Regards,
    Rube

    Ah yes the good old days, when only the super rich had hard drives, there were still floppy drives and the disks for them were actually still floppy.

  • slojoslojo Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    [Ah yes the good old days, when only the super rich had hard drives, there were still floppy drives and the disks for them were actually still floppy.

    Yessir, those things were huge, like maybe, what? 7 or 8 inches square, and -extremely- flexible, with a big cut-out for the disc. Talk about retro! And now we have the flash drive that could hold the data of thousands of those (maybe more?). In the scheme of things, that was a pretty fast jump in technology.

    - Rube

  • LadyThorneLadyThorne Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    I have a similar question with different specifics.

    One) I do my own book covers and my publisher wants 300dpi min. (books are about 5*8 on average.
    two) and this is my big problem. I am trying to make a poster to advertize my book signing. I've rendered in Bryce at 300dpi and the end result is going to be 18x24. Trouble is, every time I bring it into Photoshop to add the text stuff I get hit with 72dpi. (I've read about turning off the resampling). What size should I render in, pixel wise, when I can't render in the 6300x8400 I calculate I should need to, to get an 18x24 at 300dpi? Or at least the best image possible.

    (the fog on my cover kinda looks blocky, so I want to avoid this in the future)

  • HoroHoro Posts: 4,274
    edited December 1969

    @LadyThorne - well, if the final size is 18 x 24 (I presume that's inches) and you need a resolution of 300 dpi. you'll need to render 5400 x 7200 pixels. Indeed too much to render in one go. I hear that you could render to disk larger than 4000 pixels wide, but in fact, I've never tried this. But you can set up a simple scene that renders in a few seconds and then render to disk in the size you need. This will verify if it works or not.

    Otherwise, you can render in parts but need a tool to assemble the parts. I have a tutorial on my website (see sig). Go to Raytracing > Tutorials > Page 2 > Render > 4000 pixels; or download the PDF http://www.horo.ch/raytracing/tuts/pdf/minitut21_en.pdf.

    By the way, that dpi in the graphics programs like Photoshop are misleading. You need to render the in the right size: 24 inch at 300 dots per inch makes 7200 pixels. If you add text in Photoshop, you have to adjust the font size to the dpi set in Photoshop. When saving, just make sure you have still the full pixel size in the image.

  • LadyThorneLadyThorne Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    Thank you. Hopefully that will be helpful.

  • mindsongmindsong Posts: 37
    edited May 2014

    @slojo

    While Horo and Mr. Brinnen won't toot their own horns regarding their products (a relevant mention at best), I can.

    Their "Spherical Mapper" and "Scene Converter" products are absolute life-savers for anyone who uses Bryce to generate scene/skydomes and export them for use in other environments - both as HDRIs for lighting and and simple LDRI background images.

    They're each setup as lens objects that you align with your camera, then parent (bind them together) appropriately, after which you can render in 360-degree mode, grabbing your entire scene, top-to-bottom as a single image (bmp/jpeg, etc.). As you know about using the HDRI 'export' function *immediately* after a render (360-degree or otherwise), most domes can take these outputs with no conversion at all, allowing you to wrap a brilliant Bryce world around most any 3D software scene in about 6 steps (instructions are included for all sorts of uses).

    Once I figured out that the built-in Bryce 360 render creates a somewhat useful 'barrel' panorama, and the spherical mapper properly distorts the scene into a ... sphere ... its value became very clear.

    I'm curious how big a sphere the Bryce system lets you render using the 'render to disk' feature (breaks the 4000 pixel barrier), and I assume that exporting to an HDRI right after such a render would 'do the right thing' as well? Anyone try this?

    Bottom line: take a look at the spherical mapper... build a scene, align/bind camera, place camera to taste, set to 360 render, set pixel size of output, then render... you've got a usable skydome image and/or HDRI to use with/behind it. Note that the HDRIs capture far more range than a regular LDRI bit-map or jpeg image, (edit/add:) but are not full-ranged HDRIs. e.g. the sun is not nearly as bright in a Bryce-exported HDRI as it is in a traditional/'correctly ranged' HDRI, but using additional lighting in the target program with the Bryce background and Bryce HDRI/IBL domes is still quite effective.

    (folks, please correct me if I'm wrong or have missed/mis-stated anything)

    EDIT: note that there is still a free version of HDR-shop that does a lot of useful HDRI manipulation. It's not shown on the current HDR-Shop page, but Horo and others have links to the pre-$199 versions. They can likely answer any question you may have re: the capabilities of the free version, relative to your goals.

    cheers,

    mindsong

    Post edited by mindsong on
Sign In or Register to comment.
Rocket Fuel