Ultra-F Tile Render

[Atomicat]

Well, if I want my fractal wall I'm gonna have to generate some awful big fractals right?  So Ultra Fractal 4.04 should do that but whenever I try to generate tiles larger than say 1400x1100 it chops things off and gives me incomplete files.  It doesn't have any trouble rendering single (from main window) images up to 16,000x12,000 (whee!) which is why I find it more than strange that it has this problem.  Any suggestions?

Atomicat

[lycium]

unless ultrafractal has native support for rendering huge images directly to disk, it's not so easy:

1. pester the ultrafractal author to release a 64bit build
2. get a superpower quadcore computer with 4gb of memory
3. render night and day ...
4. find some superpowerful computer that will print your image all in one go, or segment it, ...
5. print


64bit is great, i regularly render 16000x10000 images with my programs and that's just completely impossible in 32bit since a program can use at most 2gb of memory at once using the old (dating to 386!) x86 architecture.

[David Makin]

Well, if I want my fractal wall I'm gonna have to generate some awful big fractals right?  So Ultra Fractal 4.04 should do that but whenever I try to generate tiles larger than say 1400x1100 it chops things off and gives me incomplete files.  It doesn't have any trouble rendering single (from main window) images up to 16,000x12,000 (whee!) which is why I find it more than strange that it has this problem.  Any suggestions?

Atomicat

Are you trying to render large images from a formula that computes using a whole-screen array ? If so then you will encounter problems rendering large versions.
Actually in those cases if you're using a single layer you may find you can render larger within UF rather than using disk render - provided you extend the max. allowed size of window first
I have no problems rendering large images with UF except when using such formulas.

[Atomicat]

unless ultrafractal has native support for rendering huge images directly to disk, it's not so easy:

64bit is great, i regularly render 16000x10000 images with my programs and that's just completely impossible in 32bit since a program can use at most 2gb of memory at once using the old (dating to 386!) x86 architecture.

Well it does but why should the rendering engine be any different in batch mode than it is in regular mode?  It just doesn't make sense.  Like I say, I've rendered pics up to 12,000x9,000 but the second I switch it over to disk mode it fails at anything over 1400x1100.  That's ridiculous!  Like c'mon, I was doing larger renders on me ol' 286-25!

'tomix

[Atomicat]

Are you trying to render large images from a formula that computes using a whole-screen array ? If so then you will encounter problems rendering large versions.
Actually in those cases if you're using a single layer you may find you can render larger within UF rather than using disk render - provided you extend the max. allowed size of window first
I have no problems rendering large images with UF except when using such formulas.

I'm just doing a standard internal Mandel, but it does the same thing with every formula.  I've been able to render very large single files but that's a big limitation.  If I'm going to do LARGE prints I really do need to have them sliced up nicely.  There's no way I can toss a say, 100,000x100,000 file into PSP and section it out.  This is really strange, I mean even doing a 2x2 tiling of a 4000x4000 render won't work!  Does it work for you?

'tomix

[David Makin]

I tiled a very slow to render 8000*6000 image at 4*4 and it worked fine. It could be there's a bug in the tile rendering when using uxfs ? Are you on the UF mailing list - if so mail a question to Frederik.

[lkmitch]

As David said, UF can usually render to disk without problem; I'm working on two 12,000 x 9600 pixel images now.  It sounds like something may have gotten corrupted in your install.  You can try re-installing or asking Frederik.

Kerry

[Atomicat]

As David said, UF can usually render to disk without problem; I'm working on two 12,000 x 9600 pixel images now.  It sounds like something may have gotten corrupted in your install.  You can try re-installing or asking Frederik.

Kerry

Was hoping someone had run across this before.  Oh well. Try try again.

'tomix

[Atomicat]

I tiled a very slow to render 8000*6000 image at 4*4 and it worked fine. It could be there's a bug in the tile rendering when using uxfs ? Are you on the UF mailing list - if so mail a question to Frederik.

*sigh*  Well, AMD 1800, MSI mainboard, Nvidia chipset, Gig and a half of ram, never ever ever ever ever crashes.  I beat it like a five-dollar mule and always have.  Run everything from Acad, Povray, ripping software, vid software, bloody games and whatever else, never a problem ever.  I've tried reinstalling (ver 4.03 and 4.04) and ran it under all four compatibility modes.  My mem settings are conservative.

*SIGH*

I hope the mailing list has some answers.

'tomix