Logo by blob - Contribute your own Logo!
News: Visit UltraFractalWiki for hints & tutorials on UltraFractal5
 
*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. October 26, 2014, 01:34:23 AM


Login with username, password and session length



Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
  Print  
Share this topic on DiggShare this topic on FacebookShare this topic on GoogleShare this topic on RedditShare this topic on StumbleUponShare this topic on Twitter
Author Topic: Mandelbrot set 1000 zooms | E301 | 2^1000  (Read 2294 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Dinkydau
Fractal Senior
******
Posts: 1313


1337


WWW
« on: February 25, 2012, 06:15:42 PM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/wW6cwoyZAQU&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/wW6cwoyZAQU&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1</a>

Zoom to a small mandelbrot set at a magnification of 2^1000

Rendered in 2 days. Sorry for the low quality. I'm still underestimating the speed of fractal extreme.
Logged

stardust4ever
Fractal Lover
**
Posts: 236



« Reply #1 on: March 05, 2012, 12:26:52 PM »

Nice Zoom. My first deep zooms started off in the needle area as well. In 2009, I was on the fence about whether to buy Fractal Extreme 2.0 or Ultra Fractal 5, so I downloaded trials of both. I did a modest zoom to the same location in both, at arbitrary precision. FX rendered at least a dozen times faster than UF on my 32-bit lap top, so I bought FX. Now on my new big rig with 64-bit AMD Bulldozer 8-core @ 4.2Ghz, FX renders over 30 times faster than it did on my old 32-bit dual-core laptop. Speed is ridiculous, if you have the right setup!
 Smiling Mandelbrot
 Repeating Zooming Self-Silimilar Thumb Up, by Craig
« Last Edit: March 05, 2012, 12:31:09 PM by stardust4ever » Logged
taurus
Fractal Schemer
****
Posts: 999



profile.php?id=1339106810
WWW
« Reply #2 on: March 05, 2012, 01:26:38 PM »

still unbelievable, that a zoomflight like this can be rendered in two days - even with up to date hardware.
there are some nice psychodelic moves within this video, but the most imressing thing is the optical post-pulse oscillation when the animation stops crazy eyes - really neat!

 nerd crazy eyes nerd
Logged

when life offers you a lemon, get yourself some salt and tequila!
Dinkydau
Fractal Senior
******
Posts: 1313


1337


WWW
« Reply #3 on: March 05, 2012, 07:05:50 PM »

thanks

While 2 days is not much, on HD with anti-aliasing, like a lot of zooms are, it will take much much longer. It really makes a big difference. For example, 1440×1080 with 4×4 anti-aliasing is virtually 4320×5760. Compared to 640×480 like this render, that's 81 times more work. Then there's also the iterations, more iterations for the last part, which significantly influences the rendering time as well. Unfortunately I expected this 640×480 render to take ages already. I will re-render it. I think 1080p with 2×2 anti-aliasing should be doable.
Logged

stardust4ever
Fractal Lover
**
Posts: 236



« Reply #4 on: March 07, 2012, 10:23:25 AM »

thanks

While 2 days is not much, on HD with anti-aliasing, like a lot of zooms are, it will take much much longer. It really makes a big difference. For example, 1440×1080 with 4×4 anti-aliasing is virtually 4320×5760. Compared to 640×480 like this render, that's 81 times more work. Then there's also the iterations, more iterations for the last part, which significantly influences the rendering time as well. Unfortunately I expected this 640×480 render to take ages already. I will re-render it. I think 1080p with 2×2 anti-aliasing should be doable.
Unfortunately, the render size is limited to the FX window. If your monitor is 1920x1080 and your video card setup does not allow you to expand the virtual desktop beyond the bounding box of your monitor, then you are limited to slightly less than your vertical screen height. Stupid, I know, but so far full screen rendering is not supported. Also, depending on the type of fractal and the region you are zooming into, the required file size to get an acceptable temporal quality at 1080p 30Hz is insane. 1280x720 3x3 AA is plenty in most cases. My most recent videos have been 1280x720 and 2x2 or 3x3 Anti Alias. Though some may disagree with me on encoding, I insist on rendering my AVI files using x264 set to constant quantizer placebo mode. File sizes vary wildly based on fractal detail.

I am currently using an AMD FX-8150 Bulldozer (8-cores) clocked at 4.2Ghz to render my fractals. Intel's Sandy Bridge may give it competition (Sandy Bridge performs better in floats but Bulldozer performs better in integer which is what you need for deep-zoom), plus I'll take real cores over "fake" hyper-threaded ones any day. 64-bit Windows is a must if you want blazing fast zoom movies.
« Last Edit: March 07, 2012, 10:30:27 AM by stardust4ever » Logged
Dinkydau
Fractal Senior
******
Posts: 1313


1337


WWW
« Reply #5 on: March 07, 2012, 12:03:43 PM »

My monitor is 1600×1200 so I can render at 1440×1080, fits in the window. I experienced the problem with the screen resolution when I rendered my first (test)animation. It was rendered at 1600×1200 but I could only export it as 15** × 11**, a little less for some reason. Then I also found out that virtual screen doesn't work with animations. Stupid indeed... but thus far I think 1080p is more than enough.

Your processor information raises some questions. I am currently using an intel q6700, 4 cores, 2,66 GHz. There was a friendly man with a more modern i7 2600 who did a test for me, ant it appeared to perform 1,7 times better than mine, rendering a deep image (128 bit calc). I've seen the 8-core AMD processor and in charts it appeared to be much less efficient than the i7 2600, even with 8 cores, which kind of mislead me apparently, because you say it's actually better for fractal rendering. Now I wonder, how did you know that? It's difficult to find the right processor for the right job, especially to render deep zoomed fractals. All charts have games and video editing software and things like that, which are really something else.

I agree with you on the hyperthreading, totally useless.
Logged

stardust4ever
Fractal Lover
**
Posts: 236



« Reply #6 on: March 07, 2012, 12:47:21 PM »

My appologies in advance if I'm derailing.

Integers is higher for Bulldozer, float is higher for Sandy Bridge.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8150-zambezi-bulldozer-990fx,3043-5.html

To tell you the truth, I'm kind of been an AMD fanboy ever since back in the day when a 2.167Ghz Athlon XP could outperform a 3.04Ghz Pentium 4 for less than half the price. I was searching for one benchmark that proved AMD's 8 cores outperformed Intel's 6 4 hurt in integer, and the above image was all the evidence I could find. I was expecting at least a 2x increase in performance going up from my old Phenom II 955 (3.2Ghz), but my real-world gain is actually more like 1.7

A test render I did was 4:55 minutes on my old Phenom II at 3.2 Ghz. I managed to whittle the time down to 2:48 on my new rig, with the Bulldozer overclocked at a stable 4.2 Ghz by stepping up the multiplier to 21x. The CPU runs perfectly stable at 4.2Ghz with a Noctua heatsink + 92mm fan, albeit it gets a little warm, around 70 degrees C. The RAM is 1333Mhz dual channel (4x2Gb=8) and the clock was unchanged at 200Mhz. I reran the test at a variety of clock speeds, set in BIOS, and the clock speed formed a perfect linear ratio with Fractal Extreme render performance, verifying that the raw clock cycles was the only performance bottleneck.

4:55 = 295 seconds for the Phenom II 955 @ 3.2Ghz (4 cores)
and 2:48 = 168 seconds for the FX-8150 @ 4.2Ghz (8 cores)

295/168 = 1.75 faster with O.C. settings

4.2Ghz / 3.2Ghz = 1.3125x clock cycles per core
1.3125 * 2 (twice as many cores) = 2.625x total clock cycles.

1.75 (fractal extreme benchmark ratio) / 2.625 (actual clock cycles ratio) = 1.5x more work per clock for the Phenom compared to the Bulldozer, meaning the old Phenom II processor got 50% more work done per clock per core than the Bulldozer. I can't believe that works out to nearly exactly a 1.5 ratio...

There. I said it. My happy fanboy part of me = hurt
http://www.fractalforums.com/general-discussion/needs-faster-desktop-processor-for-deep-zooming-%28integer%29/

Please download this Fractal Extreme benchmark file (400x400 pixels, 728 zooms, no guessing) and tell me how your processor stacks up to it. I used Fractal Extreme v2.20 64-bits for the benchmark testing. You will need to zoom in and then hit the "undo" button to clear the rendered pixels and restart the clock. I would love to know how Fractal Extreme performs on the Sandy Bridge, even though the news will likely hurt my ego even more.

I sympathize with Hitler:
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/SArxcnpXStE&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/SArxcnpXStE&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1</a>

Oh, and for the record, AMD still wins in the price/performance category: The 6-core, 12-threads Sandy Bridge processors start at $600 and go up from there, so had I gone the Intel route, I would have spent well over twice the money for a marginally faster processor. The Bulldozer platform was far more affordable and still gives me 8 real ALUs to play with for what it's worth.
« Last Edit: March 07, 2012, 01:47:04 PM by stardust4ever » Logged
Dinkydau
Fractal Senior
******
Posts: 1313


1337


WWW
« Reply #7 on: March 07, 2012, 01:29:54 PM »

Thanks a lot for the information. Considering increased performance of a factor 1,7 from q6700 to i7 2600, buying an AMD bulldozer would make for another 283 / 211,5 = 1,338 improved performance. 1,7 * 1,338 = 2,27. While 1,7 times faster was a bit too slow for me, 2,27 sounds more like it. Then, overclocking it could help to get even more performance. I'm very curious what's the difference. I'm currently rendering a zoom video to .avi and there is no pause button for that. After that I'll do the test immediately.

I have been thinking of buying a motherboard for 2 cpus if there's a good one available for the AMD FX-8150. For some reason the latest processors aren't as big improvements as they used to be in 2008. 2,27 Times faster would be nice, but I want moar, and don't want to run 2 computers. 2 Of those AMD processors could possibly make for a nice improvement, or maybe even 4 if that's possible for a reasonable price.

The thread you linked to appears to be interesting. I don't have time to read it right now but I'll reas it another time. Possibly some information I'm missing now is already in that thread too.

By now the zoom video has finished and I ran the test render. My time is 29,0 seconds. What's your time?
Logged

stardust4ever
Fractal Lover
**
Posts: 236



« Reply #8 on: March 07, 2012, 02:06:17 PM »

Please excuse my ignorance. I knew something was wrong because unless you had a billion cores, it shouldn't render that fast. I'm at school right now. My old 32-bit Laptop is over 30-40x slower than my render machine at home. I had the the virtual screen set to 100x100 in advanced settings so I could test my laptop at 100x100 pixels instead of 400x400 and multiply the result by 16. So yours should be just under 8 minutes. Here's a new file. Now it should render at 400x400. Remember, you need to restart the render as I can't seem to get it to save without rendering at least a few pixels. Easiest way to restart the render is to zoom in once and click undo. Or take the original file I sent you and deselect the "virtual screen" option.

The file I sent should look like a tiny version of this when completed:
http://stardust4ever.deviantart.com/art/XX-Reactor-Core-Deep-Zoom-131573460

I'm at school now and my render computer is at home. My Winodows XP laptop is 6 years old. It's got 2Gb DDR2667 RAM and a 2.0Ghz Core Duo, 32-bit processor. Fractal Extreme renders very slow on it due to 32 bits.

Benchmark times:
AMD FX-8150 @4.2Ghz (8 cores, 64 bits) - 2:48
AMD Phenom II 955 @3.2Ghz (4 cores, 64 bits) - 4:55
Intel Core Duo @2.0Ghz Laptop (2 cores, 32 bits) - 1:43:01 (1 hour, 43 min)

So that places the actual speed of my Laptop around 1/36 that of my big 8-core render machine.

* Big X render test.zip (1.26 KB - downloaded 45 times.)
« Last Edit: March 07, 2012, 04:41:09 PM by stardust4ever » Logged
Dinkydau
Fractal Senior
******
Posts: 1313


1337


WWW
« Reply #9 on: March 07, 2012, 05:29:43 PM »

You can go to "render" and click "pause", or just press p. If you then zoom in, and undo, it won't render because it's paused. If you save the file and re-open it, it will automatically start rendering. I found this out when I was trying to solve this save problem for the benchmark test with the i7 2600.

I did the test again and it turns out my time is now 7:34,8.

Your time: 2 * 60 + 48 = 168 seconds
My time: 7 * 60 + 35 = 455 seconds
455 / 168 = 2,708 times faster

That's with overclock on your processor, a very nice speed-up. Thank you for this information, really helps me. If I could just have 2 of those in one computer.
Logged

stardust4ever
Fractal Lover
**
Posts: 236



« Reply #10 on: March 07, 2012, 08:47:45 PM »

You can go to "render" and click "pause", or just press p. If you then zoom in, and undo, it won't render because it's paused. If you save the file and re-open it, it will automatically start rendering. I found this out when I was trying to solve this save problem for the benchmark test with the i7 2600.
Thanks. I didn't ever realize that you could pause stuff. If I've got several jobs running at once, I usually just set the priority to "below normal" to make sure I'm not wasting idle clocks. Then I can go exploring in another window in "normal" priority with almost no slowdown.

I did the test again and it turns out my time is now 7:34,8.

Your time: 2 * 60 + 48 = 168 seconds
My time: 7 * 60 + 35 = 455 seconds
455 / 168 = 2,708 times faster

That's with overclock on your processor, a very nice speed-up. Thank you for this information, really helps me. If I could just have 2 of those in one computer.
I read the comma as a divider and thought you meant "2708" laugh I forgot in Europe the comma often replaces the period for decimal point and visa-versa!

The 2600 has four real cores, so I would expect at least half the performance. Maybe it's true that the Intel processors rule when it comes to float-point calculations (most PC benchmarks use floating point and measure other things like memory performance) but if what you say is correct then this is very good evidence that AMD still dominates when it comes to double-precision integer arithmetic. I must ask you did you check that you are using the 64-bit edition of Fractal Extreme, and the most recent version, 2.20? Bruce made some coding enhancements, specifically to the classic Mandelbrot algorithm; he claimed there is a new up to 30% speed up for very deep Mandelbrot zoom in the 64-bit edition, and also made some other enhancements to both versions and added the ability to write a script file to vary the zoom speed of an AVI movie. The 32-bit edition will probably take an average 4x performance penalty compared to the 64-bit edition.

The overclocking is nice, but in all honesty it's just a 16.7 % speed increase over the stock 3.6Ghz. Going above 4.2Ghz would require over-volting the CPU to remain stable, which would be dangerous, and it's danged hot enough as it is. The computer already heats up the room that it sits in, by about 10 degrees Fahrenheit (5.4C), from a comfortable 70 (~25C) to about 80 (~30C). The 12mm outtake fan in the back is controlled by an analog thermal voltage controller I have attached to it (it outputs 5V at 25C and increases linearly to 12V at 40C), so it gradually picks up speed as the insides of the PC get hotter. I also attached a more powerful 92mm smart fan to the CPU heat sink block to keep the CPU temps down (the "quiet" Noctua fan that came with the sink wasn't fast enough). The PC is an over-sized matte black steel server case that weighs 50 pounds (~22 kilos)! Because I have such a large case, big fans (a large fan at low RPMs is quieter than a small fan at high RPMs and pushes the same amount of air), thermal speed regulation, and foam soundproofing inside the PC panels, it never really sounds like a race car engine, and it's quiet as a mouse when it idles. I can hear the fans gradually speed up whenever I max the processor though, and if I place my hand behind it after running a few hours, the exhaust feels hot like a hair dryer. There's also a neat 92mm fan intake fan at the front (it glows with red LEDs) which blows fresh, cool air across the hard drive bays, and a vented lid that further dampens sound in the front when closed (I have to open it to access the CDROM drive or front auxiliary UBS ports). It's also got Mrs PacMan stencilled on the side of the chassis!
http://stardust4ever.deviantart.com/art/Ms-PacMan-Case-Mod-156976036

I'm gonna stop bragging now. embarrass
« Last Edit: March 07, 2012, 09:05:06 PM by stardust4ever » Logged
Dinkydau
Fractal Senior
******
Posts: 1313


1337


WWW
« Reply #11 on: March 08, 2012, 07:15:03 AM »

Thanks. I didn't ever realize that you could pause stuff. If I've got several jobs running at once, I usually just set the priority to "below normal" to make sure I'm not wasting idle clocks. Then I can go exploring in another window in "normal" priority with almost no slowdown.
Usually setting the priority is better for that (not for benchmarks), but yeah, sometimes it can be useful. Priority doesn't always work well for some reason. I could set one fractal extreme instance to idle, and another to normal, and the idle instance would still use 25% of the cpu sometimes. Not always, just sometimes, very strange. But where it doesn't listen to idle, it does listen to pause.

I read the comma as a divider and thought you meant "2708" laugh I forgot in Europe the comma often replaces the period for decimal point and visa-versa!

The 2600 has four real cores, so I would expect at least half the performance. Maybe it's true that the Intel processors rule when it comes to float-point calculations (most PC benchmarks use floating point and measure other things like memory performance) but if what you say is correct then this is very good evidence that AMD still dominates when it comes to double-precision integer arithmetic. I must ask you did you check that you are using the 64-bit edition of Fractal Extreme, and the most recent version, 2.20? Bruce made some coding enhancements, specifically to the classic Mandelbrot algorithm; he claimed there is a new up to 30% speed up for very deep Mandelbrot zoom in the 64-bit edition, and also made some other enhancements to both versions and added the ability to write a script file to vary the zoom speed of an AVI movie. The 32-bit edition will probably take an average 4x performance penalty compared to the 64-bit edition.
Yes, 64-bit, version 2.20.

The overclocking is nice, but in all honesty it's just a 16.7 % speed increase over the stock 3.6Ghz. Going above 4.2Ghz would require over-volting the CPU to remain stable, which would be dangerous, and it's danged hot enough as it is. The computer already heats up the room that it sits in, by about 10 degrees Fahrenheit (5.4C), from a comfortable 70 (~25C) to about 80 (~30C). The 12mm outtake fan in the back is controlled by an analog thermal voltage controller I have attached to it (it outputs 5V at 25C and increases linearly to 12V at 40C), so it gradually picks up speed as the insides of the PC get hotter. I also attached a more powerful 92mm smart fan to the CPU heat sink block to keep the CPU temps down (the "quiet" Noctua fan that came with the sink wasn't fast enough). The PC is an over-sized matte black steel server case that weighs 50 pounds (~22 kilos)! Because I have such a large case, big fans (a large fan at low RPMs is quieter than a small fan at high RPMs and pushes the same amount of air), thermal speed regulation, and foam soundproofing inside the PC panels, it never really sounds like a race car engine, and it's quiet as a mouse when it idles. I can hear the fans gradually speed up whenever I max the processor though, and if I place my hand behind it after running a few hours, the exhaust feels hot like a hair dryer. There's also a neat 92mm fan intake fan at the front (it glows with red LEDs) which blows fresh, cool air across the hard drive bays, and a vented lid that further dampens sound in the front when closed (I have to open it to access the CDROM drive or front auxiliary UBS ports). It's also got Mrs PacMan stencilled on the side of the chassis!
http://stardust4ever.deviantart.com/art/Ms-PacMan-Case-Mod-156976036

I'm gonna stop bragging now. embarrass
My computer does sound like a race car engine. It's really incredibly loud. It's probably the effect of a small and fast fan as you say. I also have a large external fan that I used to use in the summer. You can see it under the table here:
http://i538.photobucket.com/albums/ff342/formule/P8210132.jpg

Now that you've seen this photo it's my time to brag. cheesy See that mug on the table? It's the fractal printed mug I won here a couple of years ago.
http://www.fractalforums.com/fractalmovies-com-spring-2009-competition/compeition-09-winner-cups-have-arrived!/
Looking back at the topic, those other mugs are awesome as well. I'm still happy with it, a very nice, personal and useful price.

Then, on my computer there is a small pyramid. It's the pyramid I used for this fractal:
http://dinkydauset.deviantart.com/art/the-Pyramid-111240946

Anymore bragging about the computer itself would probably be unnecessary. It used to be top-notch, in 2008, but now it's not special anymore. But I do have a UPS to keep my computer going when the electricity fails, you can see it on the left.
Logged

stardust4ever
Fractal Lover
**
Posts: 236



« Reply #12 on: March 08, 2012, 08:22:13 AM »

My computer does sound like a race car engine. It's really incredibly loud. It's probably the effect of a small and fast fan as you say. I also have a large external fan that I used to use in the summer. You can see it under the table here:
http://i538.photobucket.com/albums/ff342/formule/P8210132.jpg
I built a barebones for my dad in 2002 to replace the failing Windows 95 PC he still used. It had a 60mm outtake fan that spun somewhere around 6000 RPM and the noise was deafening. I eventually replaced it with an adapter and an 80mm fan. It your case has an 80mm exhaust fan in the back, you could probably mount something like this to the outside of your case and hook a larger, lower RPM fan up to it:
http://www.xoxide.com/80-120-fan-adapter-blue.html

It won't look pretty with a large, clunky fan sticking out the back, but it would be an inexpensive solution and will help with the decibels. I have extremely sensitive hearing and I can't tolerate excessive loudness. I was at a club once where the music was too loud and I actually made spit-wads out of a bar napkin to use as makeshift earplugs to protect my hearing. They worked quite well.
Now that you've seen this photo it's my time to brag. cheesy See that mug on the table? It's the fractal printed mug I won here a couple of years ago.
http://www.fractalforums.com/fractalmovies-com-spring-2009-competition/compeition-09-winner-cups-have-arrived!/
Looking back at the topic, those other mugs are awesome as well. I'm still happy with it, a very nice, personal and useful price.
Those mugs are awesome! I made a mug out of one of my fractals. I don't have a photo of it handy. It turned out decent enough, but yours are gorgeous!
http://www.deviantart.com/print/11643078/
Then, on my computer there is a small pyramid. It's the pyramid I used for this fractal:
http://dinkydauset.deviantart.com/art/the-Pyramid-111240946
Cool! I that a real stone (dug up from the earth) or is it plastic? Either way, it's beautiful.
Anymore bragging about the computer itself would probably be unnecessary.
Agreed. My apologies for getting on my high-hourse. I originally bought the case in 2005 and have upgraded it's internal contents several times. Presumably, the company still manufactures them:
http://www.yycase.com/yy-w2xx.htm
The case itself will probably last me decades, unless standards board decides to create a new class of form factors that supersede the ATX model and makes mine obsolete. Since I build my own PC, I only buy the parts I need for the upgrade.
It used to be top-notch, in 2008, but now it's not special anymore. But I do have a UPS to keep my computer going when the electricity fails, you can see it on the left.
I need to get invest in an Uninterruptible Power Supply. A simple USB signal to shut my computer into hybrid sleep is really all I need. The power supply need to only power my PC and monitor, and last long enough to put my PC into hybrid sleep safely. It should last a long time with my computer in sleep mode, and could then send a signal to wake the PC when the power comes back up. Or if the power outage lasts an extra long time and the supply fails while my computer is sleeping, I can just toggle the power switch and wake it out of hibernation. Hybrid sleep is really a great feature of Windows 7.

I've had incidents in he past where the power goes out, or my computer otherwise fails (my 2009 Phenom II system failed a lot back when I tried to overclock it) while rendering a fractal zoom movie, and I have to manually create a new zoom movie which starts from the same zoom level where the old one left off, and then I get stuck with two or more zoom files for the same movie. I later have to join the AVI files together again with avidemux, which is somewhat annoying to do, and it creates a single frame of stutter because the last frame of the previous zoom movie and the first frame of the second zoom movie are duplicates. Why can't Bruce just create a "resume" feature for unfinished zoom movies?
Logged
Dinkydau
Fractal Senior
******
Posts: 1313


1337


WWW
« Reply #13 on: March 08, 2012, 08:49:00 AM »

There is a possibility to attach such a fan thing to the outside of the computer. It may be a good idea.

Yes, the pyramid is real stone, polished to the shape of a pyramid.

i agree it's annoying not the be able to resume video renders. They usually take much more time to render than stills, yet stills can be resumed and videos can't. Probably this problem can be solved, or maybe there is a way to work around it, like the poster renders take use 1 CPU and the render time for the benchmark that doesn't reset until you zoom in and undo it.
Logged

stardust4ever
Fractal Lover
**
Posts: 236



« Reply #14 on: March 08, 2012, 02:19:09 PM »

There is a possibility to attach such a fan thing to the outside of the computer. It may be a good idea.

Yes, the pyramid is real stone, polished to the shape of a pyramid.

i agree it's annoying not the be able to resume video renders. They usually take much more time to render than stills, yet stills can be resumed and videos can't. Probably this problem can be solved, or maybe there is a way to work around it, like the poster renders take use 1 CPU and the render time for the benchmark that doesn't reset until you zoom in and undo it.
Another problem with the zoom movie renderer is that it doesn't even prompt you before overwriting the files. Since it is easy to lose hours or days of work this way, I have a habit of marking everything in my \Movies folder as read-only. A better option would be a dialog box with three options: "overwrite", "rename", and "resume". The Fractal Extreme program can then load the color palette and coordinate data from the incomplete zoom movie file to check that it matches the .fx document before proceeding.

While my current workaround is to start a new zoom movie at the same depth as the last completed frame, it may be possible to pick apart the zoom movie format and splice the frames back together using a hex editor, but I imagine this would be difficult depending on the data compression methods. Either way, as a workaround it is much easier to join them back together as AVI files, since AVI is a well-documented format. I encode with the x264 codec, then use AVIdemux to seamlessly join the AVIs together without re-encoding. HuffyYUV lossless compression or uncompressed frames would work better, but for 1280x720 30p video, the drive space required would be ginormous.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Related Topics
Subject Started by Replies Views Last post
FF reaches 1000 posts! Fractal Forums News heneganj 3 853 Last post November 01, 2006, 12:35:29 AM
by matera
Mandelbrot Set very deep Zooms Movies Showcase (Rate My Movie) fractalwizz 6 1350 Last post July 06, 2008, 08:01:12 PM
by HPDZ
1000 Iterations Mandelbulb Renderings trafassel 11 2097 Last post February 19, 2010, 08:57:22 AM
by KRAFTWERK
Good coordinates for Mandelbrot zooms? Mandelbrot & Julia Set sonofthort 4 2338 Last post October 06, 2010, 02:08:48 AM
by sonofthort
Liquid Metal M-1000 Images Showcase (Rate My Fractal) Pauldelbrot 0 149 Last post November 04, 2012, 01:07:57 PM
by Pauldelbrot

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines

Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! Dilber MC Theme by HarzeM
Page created in 0.554 seconds with 30 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.023s, 2q)