Multithreading in 3DC

[ifxs]

I'll keep it short and simple, do you want 3DC to run multiple times faster for the majority of its operations, especially in the VOX ROOM on high poly meshes?

If so, then please vote YES, as if you take a look in the Windows Task Manager, or the OSX Activity Monitor, Or a Linux Performance monitor, you will see that for MANY of the operations in 3DC, 3DC USES ONLY 1 CORE, ONE CORE!

So if you have a multicore system, especially those with 4-8+ cores, or even those with 2 cores(core2duo, etc), and you would like 3DC to finally use those other cores to make many of the processes that make you WAIT FOR THE MERGE BAR to progress for minutes, turning those wait times into mere SECONDS instead of minutes(or hours for some), please vote yes... If this matters to you, please show your support for this necessary addition to ANY modern creative application, especially AWESOME ones like 3DC!!!

thanks :-)

It's not glamourous, it's not a new tool or "feature", but it will make the app faster for nearly all of us, for some of us MANY MANY TIMES FASTER. Is this important to you?

NOTE: the MERGE process I describe above happens with a number of tools in the vox room(pose tool, etc), NOT JUST THE ACTUAL "MERGE" tool. The naming conventions in 3DC might lead you think I am talking about just using the MERGE tool, this merging process affects many tools in the vox room that becomes more and more apparent after you push a model past 1 mllion polys(depending on your system).

[Cube]

No offense but i don't think a poll is really necessary. This is not a question that anyone would vote 'no' to.

I think the only thing that matters is how hard it would be to implement, and would it actually increase performance as much as you might hope? It could be a 3+ month job for all i know, and i'm not sure many people would appreciate a freeze on other developements. From what little understanding i have of multithreaded programs, not everything actually benefits from multiple processors. Some tasks scale close to linearly with the number of cores, some actually run slower.

Of course if it really would scale linearly with the number of cores then it would be amazing!

[ifxs]

I think the only thing that matters is how hard it would be to implement, and would it actually increase performance as much as you might hope? It could be a 3+ month job for all i know, and i'm not sure many people would appreciate a freeze on other developements. From what little understanding i have of multithreaded programs, not everything actually benefits from multiple processors. Some tasks scale close to linearly with the number of cores, some actually run slower.

I agree with you but would like to ask, based on what you said: Personally, do you feel PTEX integration is/has been worth holding off on adding other LONG requested features that have been in the forum and spoken of for months and years? Can you even use PTEX outside of 3DC in your workflow? Do you use PRMAN/Renderman?

How many months has PTEX integration taken so far, with no definite end in sight? Is PTEX more important than multithreading in 3DC for you?

I like PTEX, It'll be useful in a year or so(maybe less), but what percentage of users will directly benefit more from taking 3+months to add PTEX to 3DC, as opposed to 3 months to add in multithreading?

Maybe I should create a poll asking what is more important to users, PTEX or fully multithreaded 3DC?????

[Cube]

I agree with you but would like to ask, based on what you said: Personally, do you feel PTEX integration is/has been worth holding off on adding other LONG requested features that have been in the forum and spoken of for months and years? Can you even use PTEX outside of 3DC in your workflow? Do you use PRMAN/Renderman?

No PTEX is not of any use to me.

I only started using 3D-Coat 2 weeks ago so i'm not aware of what was put on hold while it was being worked on. How long was Ptex in development for?

[ifxs]

No PTEX is not of any use to me.

I only started using 3D-Coat 2 weeks ago so i'm not aware of what was put on hold while it was being worked on. How long was Ptex in development for?

PTEX integration has taken about 2 MONTHS now(likely began shortly after its release on 18th of january), and is still not done, and I dont know ANYONE WHO WILL USE PTEX for any reason in their current production pipelines(outside of 3DC for fun), maybe in a few months or longer they will, but not now, it all still has issues with exporting, and has to be exported for use in nearly all other apps/render engines.

PTEX is fun to use inside of 3DC, but IMO serves little use in the real world for (likely) most of the 3DC users. Which would you rather have added to 3DC over the past few months???, PTEX, or Multithreading?

[artman]

Can you even use PTEX outside of 3DC in your workflow? Do you use PRMAN/Renderman?

You are wrong.Just try file Export--Export model .obj.

3.2.02 [beta]

- First version of Ptex implemented. Supports export/import in standard formats

When using export model option on a Ptex project 3DCoat automatically export a obj. with tiled Uv coordinates

along with a texture map with special filtering that can be used by any apps.

Kay Eva even loaded it in his game engine without any problems and without any seams.

export to game engine works fine I've already tried it, it's just like Andrew said. Looks much better than UV unwraps did

The main advantage is now voxel-quadrangulation-paint workflow is finally possible with real displacement and no need to make uvs.

Perpixel does not support displacement.

And microvertex had BIG issues with auto-mapping,so on complex model you always had to do handmade uvs to avoid artifacts.

Ptex totally solved that.

[ifxs]

Hello again ArtMan.... I'm sure glad that my point brought up by AbnRanger and myself just encouraged Andrew to release for all OSX users a MUCH faster build of 3DC with v3.2.04a, its great when user input can contribute to application development.

Im not arguing against PTEX, I like it, I use it for my displacement painting in 3DC, but have major issues when exporting & baking those maps, I'm just asking if people want multithreading in 3DC, 3DC users can be very defensive for an app that they are PAYING for, an app that likely wouldn't be the same app if user input wasn't taken into account in the past...

PTEX is great, but I would have enjoyed it just as much a few months from now too. I'm glad Andrew added it. This poll isnt about PTEX. And whats with people wanting to defend an application/developer who is choosing not to optimize the app for all its users? This is how apps get better in many cases, USER INPUT.

[artman]

but have major issues when exporting & baking those maps

Export and baking works fine for me and everyone who tried it so far.

I export load in max,Fine

Load in Zb, fine.

Load in Mb, also fine.

What problems to you have?

I agree multithreading would be cool but you are saying Ptex is useless outside 3DC and can only be used in Prman/renderman,

which is just plain false.

Voxel/Quadrangulate/Paint workflow is one of the most important stuff in 3DC

and Ptex solved all the issues it had with automapping.

This workflow is one of the reason my friends and I bought this app in the first place.

Ptex is not less important than multithreading I think.

[ifxs]

fine, GLAD it works for you, just like the sculpting speed was working just fine for you too(and not some of the rest of us till we spoke up and Andrew made a new build with fixes!)... great to hear, still doesn't help me and many others... again this poll is about multithreading, and obviously you havent voted yes or no, so I have a good idea of how you are treating this matter, thanks for your valuable input.

[Cube]

MONTHS, and I dont know ANYONE WHO WILL USE for any reason in their current production pipelines... See what I'm saying?

Yeah i understand what you're saying definately. But to be fair a guy from a very large London based visual effects company was interested in PTEX here on the forum, so it might have been a very good business decision to offer support for it this early. I don't move in those circles (i'm just an amateur!) but maybe it could be a real selling point for some people.

I am behind you 100% in asking for multicore support, and i saw Andrew added a reply in the 3.2 Update thread saying he will defintately work on it, but it's going to be a really tough job so i think it's something we'll just have to wait for. For me personally Voxels are literally the only thing i am buying 3D-Coat for, everything else is a bonus - but i haven't noticed merge times to be an insurmountable issue. It seems to take maybe 5 minutes to make a 16m poly volume from an imported mesh, which does seem a long time when you are twiddling fingers waiting for it to happen (like watching a kettle boil!) but it's not enough to put me off the program. For you it may be a much bigger issue if you have to do this several times every hour.

I think it's just important to remember that the program can't be perfect for every usage scenario at all times, i'm looking forward to painting on voxels more than anything else, and i realise that's REALLY a small 'market' atm.

So basically i think Muticore support (if it will really speed things up a lot) = AWESOME! but for now i'm willing to give Andrew the benefit of the doubt that it's not something he can do right away. Hope that makes sense.

[ifxs]

For me personally Voxels are literally the only thing i am buying 3D-Coat for, everything else is a bonus - but i haven't noticed merge times to be an insurmountable issue. It seems to take maybe 5 minutes to make a 16m poly volume from an imported mesh, which does seem a long time when you are twiddling fingers waiting for it to happen (like watching a kettle boil!) but it's not enough to put me off the program. For you it may be a much bigger issue if you have to do this several times every hour.

The merge process happens with MANY of the tools in the vox room, not just the actual MERGE tool. You'll see soon if you already haven't... Try using the POSE tool on a 2+million poly vox object... IT'll use 1 core for however long it takes, doing a MERGE process. SLowing down the workflow for all users who experience that...

Or try switching back and forth in volume/surface mode in the vox room after doing any changes above a miniscule size on a 5+million poly vox object(in case you arent aware, hit w-key to see all the polys in your vox room object).

It's great how instead of voting on this simple issue, people would rather debate this, really great for input on features to add to 3DC, very constructive......

THIS ISNT ABOUT PTEX, its about your support for multithreading!

[artman]

fine, GLAD it works for you, just like the sculpting speed was working just fine for you too(and not some of the rest of us till we spoke up and Andrew made a new build with fixes!)... great to hear, still doesn't help me and many others... again this poll is about multithreading, and obviously you havent voted yes or no, so I have a good idea of how you are treating this matter, thanks for your valuable input.

Multithreading has been on Andrew's to-do list for a very long time.

Holding a poll about it wont accelerate anything.

If he's not working on it,there are reasons for that.

Import any of sample objects to Ptex.

go to file-export-export model.

Load both .obj and texture in any apps....where is problem?

Nobody reported problem with this...

(I know its not about Ptex...but you repeatedly said in THIS THREAD..that its not usable outside 3DC and...that is FALSE...)

I dont know ANYONE WHO WILL USE PTEX for any reason in their current production pipelines(outside of 3DC for fun), maybe in a few months or longer they will, but not now, it all still has issues with exporting, and has to be exported for use in nearly all other apps/render engines.

PTEX is fun to use inside of 3DC, but IMO serves little use in the real world for (likely) most of the 3DC users. Which would you rather have added to 3DC over the past few months???, PTEX, or Multithreading?

If this thread has nothing to do about Ptex...stop talking about it.

[ifxs]

This is just a poll to see what interest the 3DC users have in multithreading!!!!

I'm frankly wary of a user community that is not interested in performance upgrades to their toolset, no yes votes other than mine so far, just a bunch of defensive posturing, is this what the 3DC forum is about?

I recognize my nearly NULL influence on what Andrew chooses to add to 3DC, this poll is so I and others can see what the priorities of the 3DC community are, as a community that doesn't give precedence to performance is one I'd like to be aware of before I invest more time into it.

[Cube]

It's great how instead of voting on this simple issue, people would rather debate this, really great for input on features to add to 3DC, very constructive......

Well because like i said there is no real reason for the poll. It's like Toyota putting up a poll asking if you'd like them to do a free upgrade on your car that doubles it's fuel efficiency. There is literally NO REASON for anyone to vote anything other than yes.

He already said he will implement it, so i just don't understand what anyone can say to you to make you happy?

[ifxs]

Well because like i said there is no real reason for the poll. It's like Toyota putting up a poll asking if you'd like them to do a free upgrade on your car that doubles it's fuel efficiency. There is literally NO REASON for anyone to vote anything other than yes.

He already said he will implement it, so i just don't understand what anyone can say to you to make you happy?

Yet I see no other yes votes, just a bunch of defensive posturing... again, this helps me understand a bit more about the 3DC userbase. Very helpful information IMO.

I know Andrew said he will implement it, this poll will allow me to see how many users also want this feature request added too, which so far, looks like you two do not, which just puzzles me.

STill just 1 YES vote, from me. But a whole lot of comments.

I give up on this, back to work, thanks for the input 3DC community...

[Cube]

Yet I see no other yes votes, just a bunch of defensive posturing... again, this helps me understand a bit more about the 3DC userbase. Very helpful information IMO.

I'm not sure i follow you, i have no reason to defend a program i don't even own yet. Anyone who disagrees with you is immediately not seeing the 'truth' or something? Of course EVERYONE would want multithreading if it will increase performance, but there is something called 'reality' which means it might not be as easy to implement as everyone would like.

Why didn't you answer my question about what Andrew said?

The developer of the program already told you directly that he will implement the feature, what else can anyone say to make you happy? Why make a poll asking about a feature that you already know will be implemented? I just don't understand why you are so aggressive to everyone for no good reason.

EDIT: i voted YES btw if it makes you feel any better lol

[ifxs]

I'm not sure i follow you, i have no reason to defend a program i don't even own yet. Anyone who disagrees with you is immediately not seeing the 'truth' or something?

there is no "TRUTH" I am asking about, I just want to know if users of 3DC want multithreading added to the app? I do OWN the app, proudly, its an amazing tool. If you want this feature added to 3DC, vote yes, if not vote NO, and proudly show your username as a NO vote, that simple, no depth to it, just a simple question.

[JamesE]

I'll throw in for multi-threading too, and state up front that as interesting and cool as it is for Andrew to add ptex support so fast, I really don't have any use for it myself yet. I would prefer to see much more robust, pro-level baking capabilities for whatever types of maps I want to bake, and multi-threading could help here too.

I'm usually only running 3dcoat on a 4 gig iMac with a 256 meg graphic card, as well as a similar spec'd modbook when I'm at home, so any extra performance I can squeeze out of such low end systems would be appreciated. In comparison, zbrush runs so much better on those systems, which is why I still prefer to use 3dcoat for blocking out stuff and getting it to a point where I can send off to zbrush for higher rez sculpting. At some point I'll get a beefier machine for home use, but for now that's what I have.

[Javis]

Multi-threading is on Andrew's list, and I for one would like to see it sooner, rather than later. Andrew listens to users, and it is possible that the more users speak up on the matter that it could happen sooner. It's a big issue for many things in 3DC! I'd love to be baking normal maps quicker, see the brush stroke system faster (for voxels, poly sculpting and texture painting), multi-threaded (insert tool here) and so on.

Ptex is close very close to being finished, maybe multi-threading will be the next big project for him? I know there are a number of bugs and work flow issues still on the table, so it probably wont happen for a bit... But I would still voice what you need.

[AbnRanger]

I agree with you but would like to ask, based on what you said: Personally, do you feel PTEX integration is/has been worth holding off on adding other LONG requested features that have been in the forum and spoken of for months and years? Can you even use PTEX outside of 3DC in your workflow? Do you use PRMAN/Renderman?

How many months has PTEX integration taken so far, with no definite end in sight? Is PTEX more important than multithreading in 3DC for you?

I like PTEX, It'll be useful in a year or so(maybe less), but what percentage of users will directly benefit more from taking 3+months to add PTEX to 3DC, as opposed to 3 months to add in multithreading?

Maybe I should create a poll asking what is more important to users, PTEX or fully multithreaded 3DC?????

That would be the better poll. I mean beating your competitor to market with new technology is always a good thing, but in some cases it may not make much sense when you consider it among your list of priorities. In this case, I haven't needed to use Ptex and may not for some time, but I know for a certainty that I would make use of multi-threaded calculations right away, and do so all the time. So would every other user. Therefore, it stands to reason, for me anyway, that there exists a MUCH greater need for multi-threading than anything else in 3DC, apart from the usual bug fixes. It needs to be an application that squeezes every last bit of performance from the hardware on hand.

[AbnRanger]

Multithreading has been on Andrew's to-do list for a very long time.

Holding a poll about it wont accelerate anything.

If he's not working on it,there are reasons for that.

Import any of sample objects to Ptex.

go to file-export-export model.

Load both .obj and texture in any apps....where is problem?

Nobody reported problem with this...

(I know its not about Ptex...but you repeatedly said in THIS THREAD..that its not usable outside 3DC and...that is FALSE...)

If this thread has nothing to do about Ptex...stop talking about it.

Didn't know you were given the responsibility of being the forum Magistrate. That's a new revelation.

[spacepainter]

It's the number of CPU's that count. ;-)

[Ondrej Svadlena]

Multithreading in 3DC is definitely a priority for me (where applicable, of course - just take Maya, for example, and what percentage of it's functions are multithreaded. Not much - and the Maya users have been begging for this for years)

I've spent hours (well probably days, in total) waiting for the quadrangulation process on a 30+ vox layers 40 million poly sculpt and wished it used all four cores on my machine. It was also quite frustrating to find out that Maya was only able to load some of the outputted OBJ's because half the time they had corrupt geometry.