Plant vs. rendering time

[Maciej]

Gentlemen,

I work on a residential scheme, and there are hundreds of trees to be placed.

I have created a few with Plant Editor, and, regreteably, rendering time was about 40min for 1 pass (res 1920x1080 which is not hires at all..)

Is there any relation between Ar Plant (ie complex, standard or wide tree, level of branches, number of leafs, etc., etc. - to find the right balance between rendering time and tree quality?

Any help appreciated.

Attached:

1. Aerial View 

2. trees I have created with leaf bitmaps

[George Ioannidis]

I think there isn't a rule of thumb as an answer to your question, Maciej. It mostly depends on what you are trying to achieve. As I can see, your rendering is aerial picture taken from bird's perspective, i.e. from very long distance. Any detailed trees aren't really distinguishable from that far, so maybe it would be good idea to use low res trees for the most distanced and slightly more complex for the trees in foreground. Though I doubt it could be noticeable at all, even at higher resolutions. As an alternate solution, did you tried to use RPC trees instead of AR plants? RPCs give quite acceptable results in such situations.

[Maciej]

George, I used to use RPCs, but unfortunately last time I have some problems to install this software. I'll try again anyway. Looks it really could help. 

[Roy Hirshkowitz]

Which engine?  The performance hit for using trees with the Hybrid (or Path Tracer) engine is smaller-- perhaps worth a try.

[Maciej]

I use standard. As far as my experience is concerned, for my purposes is more than sufficient.

The point is I need more views, and this I sent was just a "bonus" for the client. The developer was asked to show the landscape impact, and some man's eye height views are to be prepared.

But I will try simple (standard) trees.

[Roy Hirshkowitz]

My point is that it may be faster if you use another engine-- try the Hybrid.

[Garret Diduck]

Slightly off topic, but can we have the option of the Hybrid in the Plant Editor?

[Roy Hirshkowitz]

I'll take a look at it.

[Maciej]

Roy, thanks for your tip. It works - ca 48 minuts per 1 pass instead of 65... :)

[Roy Hirshkowitz]

Still seems slow for this.  Displacement maps? For the grass perhaps?  Could be a memory issue as well.

[Maciej]

Well, it may be. I do not use a special workstation, acad-dedicated...  :)

However, without trees works pretty nice, just seconds per pass... No displacement map, just coloured bitmap for whole site plan applied as decal, simpe houses, no stuff indoor. 

My guess is all trees are far to complex for this view: 5-6 levels of branches, 7-8 buds, 4-5 leafs on bud...   It doesn't look easy, does it? 

[Francois Plourde]

As a comparison, here's one I've done last year at 4000x2400 resolution using 635 trees and plants (from the acurender nxt tree library)+ a few RPC shrubs. Time for 1st pass: 15m:27s (standard engine). I also tried at your resolution 1920x 1080 : 3m:43s for first pass. I think it might be a memory issue as Roy was thinking.

[George Ioannidis]

Fantastic work Francoise! Absolutely fantastic. One of the best bird's eye perspectives here!

What is that pitch black material on the roofs if I may ask? Some kind of Canadian tiles absorbing all the light? ;)