Messages 46 - 62 of 62
First | Prev. | 1 2 | Next | Last |
Skybase
![]() |
So I tried today about making a video tut on it and it turns out my surroundings are too loud for some reason and everything around me just attempts to fail me making this video. I'll do a write up instead and then make a video tutorial since this is a big big big topic and I think it can use some help. There are some bits and pieces being discussed here that I'll include in the write up. I'll introduce some techniques I use to fake some of the looks and feels and also give some useful tricks on what makes for "optimal renders." Actually part of the issue is caused by ourselves, and I'll highlight all that stuff too! I basically want this to be useful for everybody else so not only FilterForge users, so I'll write it in a general way, but I'll touch on FilterForge largely as we discuss it. |
|||||
Posted: July 11, 2012 1:42 pm | ||||||
Morgantao
![]() |
Sounds cool!
Oh, and I know how it is to have a loud surrounding when you try recording a video... Most detering aspect of tut making for me! ![]() |
|||||
Posted: July 11, 2012 3:54 pm | ||||||
SpaceRay
![]() |
Thanks really very much Skybase for your help, work and time to make this surely very helpful and interesting tutorial (or whatever you call it) for optimizing the configuration of the filter and options to get the optimal render speed
I think that for this topic is better perhaps a written tutorial instead of a video tutorial, so I think that your idea of making it this way I like it and is better AND also you can print it and have it outside.
Yes, I agree totally with this as I have seen the results that appear in this thread and HOW MUCH different the speed can be reduced or increased by just changing the AA and AO settings and that the speed gain is really VERY MUCH. AA = Antialias AO = Ambient Oclusion |
|||||
Posted: July 16, 2012 10:26 am | ||||||
SpaceRay
![]() |
I wonder if the speed of the FF command line rendered is the same than the one using the full version of filter forge (I mean the software open)
As there has not been any further answer I do not know if this has been solved perhaps with FF customer support or Vincs has been able to solve it by himself. |
|||||
Posted: August 23, 2012 5:59 pm | ||||||
SpaceRay
![]() |
It would be very useful and interesting to know how to optimize the quality of the result and balance it with the render time. Also would be good to make a draft and low quality test render to see if this is really what we want to make and then put the final best settings for the final result
Thanks for helping, but I know that you may be busy, and do not want to bother you, so do it when you want and can make it and feel right to do it. |
|||||
Posted: August 23, 2012 7:40 pm | ||||||
Skybase
![]() |
Speed seems pretty relative of a subject really. Some people have awfully slow computers and given a combination of awfully bad filter construction it does become "slow filters"
|
|||||
Posted: August 23, 2012 11:40 pm | ||||||
McMac
Posts: 1 |
I am a bit disappointed after being rather excited about the beautiful effects that can be achieved with Filter Forge.
I have a FAST mac book pro computer with lots of space. I use it constantly for professional photo editing and graphics. FF is crawling (on broken knee caps). I have followed the instructions for turning off the 4 pass preview, and unclicking various options to speed things up - and nothing notable happened to the speed of things. Reducing the size of an image (fr om 300 dpi to 100ish) to get FF to move along is not an option. I need good resolution at 300 dpi, which is standard in the industry for printing. Re-enlarging after running FF does not bring back the deleted pixels, it only enlarges the jaggies (that was a suggestion I read somewh ere as to how to speed it up a bit). Speed being relative, it is also money. Being able to take a shower and get dressed and still have FF processing a filter that was used as a sample image to sell the product is relatively TOO LONG! Also, when tweaking a filter's setting to get it 'just right' for the users tastes, there needs to be a way to save and name the adjustment - quickly and efficiently. Which will also save time with future projects - if you are working on a series of images that need to have the same effect. This isn't a new concept - it is common for every other high end plug that I own. |
|||||
Posted: April 16, 2014 1:45 pm | ||||||
unmessy
Posts: 4 |
I know this is an old thread, but I wonder if any of you guys can help - I am having the same problem.
Many of the filters render incredibly slow. I tried reading in the forums for optimizing settings, but even with the tweaks I am getting an unusable rendering speed. I made a test of rendering the same filter that was in the discussion : simple stone http://www.filterforge.com/filters/9436.html in a 2000x2000px resolution. Took 2 hours and 13 minutes and my fans were running at full speed... Here are my specs: OS X El Capitan, 10.11.4 MacBook Pro 17 inch, Early 2011 2.3 Ghz Core i7 processor 16 GB 1333 Mhz DDR3 RAM 1TB SSD It's not the newest machine, but still pretty fast, I have no problem working with large files in Photoshop, or processing video. My Filter Forge rendering options I've set to use All cores, 90% RAM usage, Anti-alias sources unchecked. What can I change to get usable rendering speed? Can some of you make the same test and post it here? Thanks ![]() |
|||||
Posted: September 26, 2016 4:43 pm | ||||||
Rachel Duim
![]() |
Try this: set Anti-Aliasing to Off. This should improve your render times. When the output is done, you can put it into FXAA for some anti-aliasing. Should save you time. I am a Mac user as well, I have the mid-2015 version of the MacBook Pro and it is faster. But this is a slow filter, so try this out and let me know how it goes.
Math meets art meets psychedelia. |
|||||
Posted: September 26, 2016 6:23 pm | ||||||
GMM
Moderator
Posts: 3491 |
unmessy, please check the relevant thread. Also, you may want to try the beta version: it has been rewritten from scratch and should be faster and more stable.
|
|||||
Posted: September 27, 2016 11:15 am | ||||||
unmessy
Posts: 4 |
Thank you for all your replies.
I have tried Anti-Aliasing off, it definitely reduced the time to 29 minutes. Using the exact same settings in the beta version of Filter Forge 6 it's only 20 minutes. That is definitely a big improvement, but still seems like an inordinate time to wait for a simple filter. I can render several minutes worth of HD video in After Effects with 3D in less time - on the same computer. (I hope this does not count as bitching... just a comparison) I am not particularly interested about this specific filter (simple stone), I simply chose this to make some benchmarking tests because it was mentioned in this post. Should I choose a different one for testing? ![]() |
|||||
Posted: September 27, 2016 5:24 pm | ||||||
unmessy
Posts: 4 |
Hi Rick,
Thanks for your note. I think I have Ambient Occlusion OFF.
|
|||||
Posted: September 27, 2016 6:00 pm | ||||||
Rachel Duim
![]() |
Any "lighting" filter with Shadowing set to Ambient Occlusion will be slow. Simple Stone is a simple filter with a complicated lighting model, hence the slower speed. Turn Off Shadowing and it is fast.
I noticed that my render times on my newer MacBook Pro were about twice as fast as your times (early 2011 vs mid 2015), which shows that computers are just getting faster... nothing you can do about that. Benchmarking a tool kit is a difficult concept since different components from the tool kit run at greatly varying speeds AND filter design greatly affects speed as well. Perhaps someone can point us at some good filters that are designed well for your testing. I haven't got a clue on what to pick. NOTE: click the outer ring of the lighting model to turn off Shadowing. Math meets art meets psychedelia. |
|||||
Posted: September 27, 2016 6:09 pm | ||||||
Rachel Duim
![]() |
||||||
Posted: September 27, 2016 6:21 pm | ||||||
unmessy
Posts: 4 |
||||||
Posted: September 27, 2016 6:53 pm | ||||||
MuseMary
Posts: 1 |
2021- FF 10- Super Long Rendering
Just bought the FF 10. The rendering takes hours!!!!! I love filter forge, though the adminstration MUST fix this issue and post current instructions for settings ASAP to help with slow rendering, until there is a fix! |
|||||
Posted: April 6, 2021 7:39 pm | ||||||
emme |
Can you provide some more detailed info? Filter(s), rendering settings, image resolution, hardware, CPU usage? |
|||||
Posted: April 7, 2021 7:43 am |
Filter Forge has a thriving, vibrant, knowledgeable user community. Feel free to join us and have fun!
33,711 Registered Users
+18 new in 30 days!
153,531 Posts
+36 new in 30 days!
15,347 Topics
+72 new in year!
25 unregistered users.