Is anyone else having a problem with Bryce 5 locking their computer or it not accepting some of the old BR4 files?? Everytime I get into creating a pic, Bryce locks down and totally kills my puter. I just wondered if it was me only or if it is a program wide problem.

yeah I get that sometimes (it just locks up bryce)I try to save alot "every 5 mins or so" I can use all my bryce files except for a few bryce 2 files open as nothing I use Mac OS 9.1 G4 433mhz 512 RAM I'm not sure if all my problems are from bryce though

I have not seen that problem on Windows 2000 with 256meg of RAM. TomD

I haven't had that problem.. PIII 800 512/megs Win98 But I have had .exe errors when trying to load the program itself.

I haven't had problems opening B4 files...I have crashed Bryce quite a few times with large textures and I really don't like the integration of the network rendering for stills...hopefully they'll realease a bug fix or something. Jared

its more mem management than bryce. Windows sux at memory management. go get a memory manager..like rambooster (free) set the preferences to free about 5% of your ram every 30 seconds (dont accept its default setup) http://www.sci.fi/~borg/rambooster/index.htm luck BT

I find B5 to be slower at rendering than B4. Significantly so. Even with normal AA selected. It also seems to lag a bit more than B4 from function to function. But the quality of the render is superior to 4, mostly due to the improved lighting functions.

Yeah, all I have is the demo version. It's SLOW on my 1gig p3 with 384megs ram. I hear the full version is better. But from the demo I'm afraid that the full version will be too slow also on my set-up. I really like the new features but even when rendering with old B4 style settings the demo just sits there mocking me! :) Heck even loading/saving files that B4 did in a snap take forever in the demo.

Brian S - I work at home with a PII 450 with 256 megs of RAM and I find the rendering times acceptable, though not great. I, however, may be more forgiving since I work in a game production environment and know how long ray-traced 1028x768 renders take even on high-end systems. The images I work with take about a half-hour to an hour to render with no anti-aliasing, and overnight with all the bells and whistles. But, that's just me. :-) TomD

Well, it seems to be a heavy graphic related problem. It usually occurs when I use a lot of grass or trees, so I guess there is a bug with graphic intensive scenes. Thanks for all the responses. It helps me get a clear view of what's going on. I am going to call Corel support in a day or two. I will let all you know what I find out! Annette

TomD: Yeah, I used to do stuff on an Amiga 2500, at 640x480 with some mirrored spheres and that oh so cool checkered floor sometimes took days to render! I could live with the render times somewhat, but alot of times just trying to move 1 terrain model takes alot of time. And that's with the terrain being the only thing in the scene.(maybe I should switch to wire frame mode instead of openGL?) And I'm having trouble doing things like getting online while rendering, Bryce4 always seemed fine for at least letting me surf the net/ download files while waiting for the render to finish and what not. Now Bryce 5 the demo anyway seems to take the WHOLE pc over.

Brian - Coincidentally, I'm doing a render now while surfing (don't tell the boss!)and all is well. It could very easily by the demo version. As for display, yes, take it out of OpenGL mode. Your display rate is a slave to your video card and I suspect that under OpenGL you'd need a high-end card like an Oxygen or similar to get the performance that you want. I've experimented and my GeForce II MX at work isn't butch enough for it at 1280 x 960 (gee...I wonder if that could be the problem... ;-) ) TomD

Hmm, well I guess I'm probably asking alot of this PC. I run at 1600x1200 res. I have trouble placing my objects without openGL on though. Oh well, gotta make some sacrifices somewhere! When I do a full render I usually do it at a res of 2048x1536 or something like that, so if I decide to print it out at 8x10 it looks good. I run a GeForce3 card BTW. That's why I complain about long render times. Other people use this PC too and usually want it for gaming, as do I on occasion! :)

:-) I hear that. Unfortunatately, the GeForce 3 card won't help your render times much, if at all. Its all CPU. :-( Personally, I'm looking long and hard at upgrading to one of the Athlon T-bird 1.4 Ghz chips, purely as a render stress reliever. :-) TomD