LOL, the guy just blocked me... Ok then ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

hornet3d posted at 3:31 PM Wed, 19 April 2023 - #4462775

  Compared with many hobbies Poser is relatively cheap so a little extra on the electricity bill is really not worth worrying about, for most users anyway.

Well here allot of people gotten hit hard, since beginning of the year they doubled the price, in our Naber Hood Allot of people now got the bills for the quarter of over 2'000 $ some even over 3'000 $  this is really hard, for the older generations that only have a little pension who need a little more heat they suffer most. It is when it is getting really cold in the house, and when you think twice when taking a hot shower. If you don't pay the bill well then, sure you will make no more renders. A point where every penny starts to count. 

If your power bill is a grand or more each month then you might want to talk to someone about a lot more than the cost of a Poser render. Maybe talk to Afrodite-Ohki about solar or find out if heat pumps are something you can invest in. If you are paying a grand or more a month for power, the software costs more than you wish to pay, and the software underperforms per your expectations; return it and get your money back so you can pay your bills instead adding to your misery with every button push.

vopehov506 posted at 6:00 PM Wed, 19 April 2023 - #4462786

hornet3d posted at 3:31 PM Wed, 19 April 2023 - #4462775

  Compared with many hobbies Poser is relatively cheap so a little extra on the electricity bill is really not worth worrying about, for most users anyway.

Well here allot of people gotten hit hard, since beginning of the year they doubled the price, in our Naber Hood Allot of people now got the bills for the quarter of over 2'000 $ some even over 3'000 $  this is really hard, for the older generations that only have a little pension who need a little more heat they suffer most. It is when it is getting really cold in the house, and when you think twice when taking a hot shower. If you don't pay the bill well then, sure you will make no more renders. A point where every penny starts to count. 

I can relate to that as there has been a similar increase here in the UK with some finding that the cost of their energy has gone up by the equivalent of $600 a month even with government assistance.  On top of that mortgage rates are up close to 5% which means  some who are on short term contracts are struggling to renegotiate their mortgage. 

If that was not enough inflation is growing at 10% but that is the headline rate, food prices increased on average by 16.7% for the 12 months up to January this year.  I am not sure what is is right now but it is above 10%.  It is believed 320,000 people need to use food banks just to stay fed each week.

That is just the financial side this year we have seen one strike after another railway workers, postal workers, lawyers, government departments, teachers and right now both nurses and junior doctors are on strike.  

Our National Health service, once seen by some as being world leading, is in crisis with the service short of about 10% of staff, waiting times for urgent care is longer now than ever before and if you have an accident you can expect to wait for hours for and ambulance and then I Accident and Emergency.  One of my neighbours tripped while out walking earlier this week smashing in the side of her face, She was left for almost four hours on the cold concrete before the ambulance arrived. Sadly almost everyone can tell you of personal experience of similar occurrences.

So what the heck has this to do with Poser, well firstly I accept that those struggling to eat will be unlikely to be using Poser but spend anytime in the forums and you will find there are some people where their health is an issue and their escape is Poser or similar software.   For them is is an escape from the harsh world you described which is why I become very worried if  they are given costs on the use Poser that could scare them particularly if those cost are inaccurate or not qualified.

Less worrying, but of equal concern, I tend to get uneasy when any Poser user is given duff information which could convince them not to try something new that may give them a lot of enjoyment.  There are those the love Firefly and have no intention to use Superfly, if that is what gives them pleasure then good for them.  I am not against anyone who promotes the benefits of Firefly for them and encourages others to try it.  What I am against is the trashing of alternatives, we should encourage others to try Superfly, fi they don't like if fine, Firefly may have another user join the ranks.

That's is it, I mean no harm of criticism of any one and, with that said, I will get off my soap box. 

hornet3d posted at 6:01 AM Thu, 20 April 2023 - #4462814

In global Terms the political energy increase has nothing to do with Poser, Like I mentioned before, we are making here some statistical tests. But this is another job! After using Superfly the other day " For the First Time " to test it I noticed a Power increase of 3KWH . Due the setup of the statistics the house system is measuring activities ( Might be a coincidence ) So there was a high Increase of Power usage with this sort of rendering. Meaning if you just use it once in a while it would not hit you, but assuming you do every day then you would get a power increase of 270 Kwh every quarter resulting on the Power bill to be approx 108 $ more, in a year it would be 432 $ . I hope you get my point now. It is not meant to be a Instead of not using Poser as the difference is taken between usage with Firefly and Superfly so Superfly generates a Increase of 3KWH  a day.

It might be less using Optix I have not tested it jet, but reading the forums allot of users need to switch to CPU for certain renders in superfly as Optix is not always supported. Also the render of the Superfly clip measured a Increase of 3x more consummations then firefly .

For some or most it might not be an Impact, for others it is if it generates 432$ more on your power bill a year If we had like Americans just 12c a KWH then sure no one would notice it and it would be affordable and only cost  129$ a year to Play with superfly.

As for a reminder that this thread is about a consumption increase and not for searching help on how to build up a render or setup a render. It is to see the differences between Firefly and Supoerfly on your computer Konsumation, It is not to say witch does a better job on end results as this is a Individual taste of the user and depending what the render is used for.  Also it is not meant to make any critiques on how your render will be ending up as each of the two have there advantages and disadvantages, there both part of Poser. It literarily is trying to show the difference of time and energy usage .  For some it might be worth a thought for others that have not to worry about there bills do not have to think about it , it will sure not hit there budgets. It is not a loss to save as you could spend energy savings on assets you buy for poser.

vopehov506 posted at 7:58 AM Thu, 20 April 2023 - #4462821

hornet3d posted at 6:01 AM Thu, 20 April 2023 - #4462814

In global Terms the political energy increase has nothing to do with Poser, Like I mentioned before, we are making here some statistical tests. But this is another job! After using Superfly the other day " For the First Time " to test it I noticed a Power increase of 3KWH . Due the setup of the statistics the house system is measuring activities ( Might be a coincidence ) So there was a high Increase of Power usage with this sort of rendering. Meaning if you just use it once in a while it would not hit you, but assuming you do every day then you would get a power increase of 270 Kwh every quarter resulting on the Power bill to be approx 108 $ more, in a year it would be 432 $ . I hope you get my point now. It is not meant to be a Instead of not using Poser as the difference is taken between usage with Firefly and Superfly so Superfly generates a Increase of 3KWH  a day.

It might be less using Optix I have not tested it jet, but reading the forums allot of users need to switch to CPU for certain renders in superfly as Optix is not always supported. Also the render of the Superfly clip measured a Increase of 3x more consummations then firefly .

For some or most it might not be an Impact, for others it is if it generates 432$ more on your power bill a year If we had like Americans just 12c a KWH then sure no one would notice it and it would be affordable and only cost  129$ a year to Play with superfly.

As for a reminder that this thread is about a consumption increase and not for searching help on how to build up a render or setup a render. It is to see the differences between Firefly and Supoerfly on your computer Konsumation, It is not to say witch does a better job on end results as this is a Individual taste of the user and depending what the render is used for.  Also it is not meant to make any critiques on how your render will be ending up as each of the two have there advantages and disadvantages, there both part of Poser. It literarily is trying to show the difference of time and energy usage .  For some it might be worth a thought for others that have not to worry about there bills do not have to think about it , it will sure not hit there budgets. It is not a loss to save as you could spend energy savings on assets you buy for poser.

I understand your aim, my problem is understanding the procedure you are going to use to reach any meaningful conclusions.  For any comparison to be valid both the Firefly and the Superfly will have to use optimum render settings which will be different for both.  On the face of it finding the optimum settings for Firefly should be relatively easy as it has been is use for such a long time.  Superfly is a different issue, not only is it relatively new, with Poser 13 it has had massive changes.  Someone on the team that wrote the code for Poser 13 might have enough knowledge to get close to optimum but how can we be sure what ever is used is optimum.  For all the rest my guess is it is too new to define optimum render settings.  Apart from that how do you define optimum anyway, one person goal for a render is not acceptable to others.  Personally my aim is not to create photo realistic renders, more believable renders therefore, what I accept as a decent render would be rejected by someone looking for photo realistic results.  It goes on, one person acceptance of grain is enough for another to reject a render, the same for lighting, the same for shadows.  My personal view that whatever results you finish up with will be, at best and educated guess and at worse like sticking you finger in the wind to measure wind speed.    

Furthermore, it has been said over and over again that the methodology of the test for Superfly using 3 KwH is faulty. Restating it over and over again by OP does not make it true in light of others' tests in the thread above and thus the tactic of scaring people into not using Poser 13 because it costs a lot of electricity to render in it cannot be condoned.

>>> Someone on the team that wrote the code for Poser 13 might have enough knowledge to get close to optimum but how can we be sure what ever is used is optimum.  

That's what the render presets are meant to do. They give a starting point. It has been suggested several times that the OP should use Optix High render preset to cut down on render time. Heck, he can even start with OptiX Medium and use PostFX to get rid of the graininess if any exists. But instead of making any attempt to do so, he continues to harp on whatever settings he used to render SuperFly with CPU. If he was really interested in learning, he would have made an attempt at using OptiX since he has two compatible GPUs in his system. 

It is the user's choice to render in SuperFly with CPU. That is not Poser's fault. 

It is the user's choice not to take the advice of using OptiX rendering, since he has compatible hardware. That is not Poser's fault. 

It is the user's choice that he is having problems with his NVidia drivers. That is not Poser's fault. 

And this is why some have given up trying to give him advice.

DCArt posted at 10:57 AM Thu, 20 April 2023 - #4462848

>>> Someone on the team that wrote the code for Poser 13 might have enough knowledge to get close to optimum but how can we be sure what ever is used is optimum.  

That's what the render presets are meant to do. They give a starting point. It has been suggested several times that the OP should use Optix High render preset to cut down on render time. Heck, he can even start with OptiX Medium and use PostFX to get rid of the graininess if any exists. But instead of making any attempt to do so, he continues to harp on whatever settings he used to render SuperFly with CPU. If he was really interested in learning, he would have made an attempt at using OptiX since he has two compatible GPUs in his system. 

It is the user's choice to render in SuperFly with CPU. That is not Poser's fault. 

It is the user's choice not to take the advice of using OptiX rendering, since he has compatible hardware. That is not Poser's fault. 

It is the user's choice that he is having problems with his NVidia drivers. That is not Poser's fault. 

And this is why some have given up trying to give him advice.

I agree with that and I am also very thankful that someone who better understands what they are are doing has set up the presets other wise I would not know where to begin.  The point is they are a starting point and I am tweaking setting in areas I would never of dreamed of doing in Poser 12.  With so many such settings to play with getting a set up that you can compare with Firefly with the aim of working out which uses less electricity in a regular basis seems difficult if not impossible, assuming of course you care enough to spend the time working it out.

Rhia474 posted at 9:12 AM Thu, 20 April 2023 - #4462826

Furthermore, it has been said over and over again that the methodology of the test for Superfly using 3 KwH is faulty. Restating it over and over again by OP does not make it true in light of others' tests in the thread above and thus the tactic of scaring people into not using Poser 13 because it costs a lot of electricity to render in it cannot be condoned.

Yes that is true it has been said "but not tested" , it has been said that it is not possible using that much in 5 min, butt there was never something mentioned that it is a 5 min rendering :) 

It is a approx. daily use ! 8h -16 h .... All in all it is not that much what Superfly is using if you would calculate it in a month that would be in EU 32$ in a "month" and in the US less then 11$ "saying if you use it on daily basis". or do you want to pretend it does not cost anything? that would be rather naive. So these numbers are absolutely not exaggerated! It is cheap, yes, but more expensive then firefly.

Firefly would be about 10.50$ in EU and 3.50$ in the US a Month, consumption is about 3x higher on Superfly that is all wat it is, but at the end not that expensive either way it just shows what is the cheaper way. Like "you" say Firefly might be the cheaper result , A budget alternative. At the end it is up to any individual what he likes to use but reality is that nothing is Free.

 That is Life even if you lift the light switch you Pay, if you flush the toilet you Pay . But you never think about how much you Pay you just pay , because you are just programmed to be that way to Pay.

vopehov506 posted at 1:37 PM Thu, 20 April 2023 - #4462868

Rhia474 posted at 9:12 AM Thu, 20 April 2023 - #4462826

Furthermore, it has been said over and over again that the methodology of the test for Superfly using 3 KwH is faulty. Restating it over and over again by OP does not make it true in light of others' tests in the thread above and thus the tactic of scaring people into not using Poser 13 because it costs a lot of electricity to render in it cannot be condoned.

Yes that is true it has been said "but not tested" , it has been said that it is not possible using that much in 5 min, butt there was never something mentioned that it is a 5 min rendering :) 

It is a approx. daily use ! 8h -16 h .... All in all it is not that much what Superfly is using if you would calculate it in a month that would be in EU 32$ in a "month" and in the US less then 11$ "saying if you use it on daily basis". or do you want to pretend it does not cost anything? that would be rather naive. So these numbers are absolutely not exaggerated! It is cheap, yes, but more expensive then firefly.

Firefly would be about 10.50$ in EU and 3.50$ in the US a Month, consumption is about 3x higher on Superfly that is all wat it is, but at the end not that expensive either way it just shows what is the cheaper way. Like "you" say Firefly might be the cheaper result , A budget alternative. At the end it is up to any individual what he likes to use but reality is that nothing is Free.

 

Where is the detail on what procedure was used to come up with these figures, so far it defies logic, on a complex render my machine can run at 100% CPU whether using Firefly or Superfly.  Superfly can be faster in Poser 13 so how can it possibly cost me more?

I spent ten years as a field trial manager/ co-ordinator so I know that any data has to be provided with procedures so that any result can be independently verified. 

Based on all you have said so far it is impossible to come to the conclusion that Superfly is more expensive than Firefly and only suggests your whole aim has to come to a conclusion you had already decided on before you started any tests.

For 1.6 second of computing per frame, the result even slightly grainy remains awesome.
Furthermore, we can see that the computations are correct:

that being said, one can control the limits of the shadow by the lights settings (area lights tend to have more blurry borders, compared to spot/points) plus the light's shadow settings.

Measurements are complex for sure, but anyone can do it if they are willing to do them to realize what they really use and for what they are using it , sure the answer will be hard. If you do not have any counters measurements then just shut down your workstation a day write what you used. Next day turn it on all day and Play, make your renders, let it runn. then you will see the difference. And so on! It is on how our statistical project is based on, a simple study ( Not Just Poser ) Economic. It is normal that people start spazzing when they realize what is happening.  

Actually something Humanity should do to learn not  wasting to much not just pay and obey.  

We had a conference on how much it would save if you just get the hot water you really need that would be a gigantic saving ! so you could only Imagine how the reactions were. A wonder that the cops did not have to come.  It is because every Individual does not want to hear it, does not want to renounce. They just want that hot water running no matter if they use it or not. 

So just a minority is willing to hear, to really do something, to realize what they really use, what they need, what they waist. And you realize when talking to People who is who.

There is a saying amongst Farmers " If one Sheep jumps down the cliff all will fallow " and yes it is a fact. The first thing a Politic will learn in the University to become a good leader.

None of which justifies the statement that Superfly is more expensive than Firefly but, that said, on the basis you can wake up someone who is asleep but not someone who is pretending to be asleep I will drop out of this thread.

Y-Phil posted at 1:59 PM Thu, 20 April 2023 - #4462874

For 1.6 second of computing per frame, the result even slightly grainy remains awesome.
Furthermore, we can see that the computations are correct:

that being said, one can control the limits of the shadow by the lights settings (area lights tend to have more blurry borders, compared to spot/points) plus the light's shadow settings.

ok Slightly grainy is a way to be Interpreted . But in old times it was when Papa climbed on the roof to adjust the antenna for the TV to get a better Image and mama was giving advise out the window when the Image got gainless. A wonder that in these times Papa's did fall off the roofs.

vopehov506 posted at 3:09 PM Thu, 20 April 2023 - #4462884

ok Slightly grainy is a way to be Interpreted . But in old times it was when Papa climbed on the roof to adjust the antenna for the TV to get a better Image and mama was giving advise out the window when the Image got gainless. A wonder that in these times Papa's did fall off the roofs.

1.6 seconds per frame: not a high quality, but sure thing Mama could have asked Papa to turn the antenna if such a naked beauty was to appear on the screen... 

The grain is from the conversion to a 256 color gif. OMFG...........

It is laughable that looking at a single frame in a 256 color smashed to death gif and compare it to renders that no one else actually has....

The original frames, do not have any grain. None of them, not a bit........................ 

I am glad that people can be a critic of my 1.6 second frames in an animation I whipped up that obviously did not use anywhere near 3KWH of power...

I even matched what the OP stated about shadows taking hours to render each frame.... And I did it in 1.6 seconds a frame....

This thread started out as Poser users spending a dollar a frame to render anything. Which is bullshit, and has been massively disproven.

I show an example of how to do it at 1.6 seconds a frame and people tear apart the gif I posted thinking those are the actual render frames....

Again, this is not about someone asking for help to actually render 1.6 second frames for themselves.

It is not about learning or saving money on utilities either.

The intent of this thread is to mock anyone that responded to the OP's thread. The OP already questioned if I was trolling....

Here is the frame in question, so all of you can tear it to pieces....

So where is the graininess again? It looks horrible doesn't it.....................................................................

Again, 1.6 seconds to render a frame, with no graininess.... 

That must not be possible if the person claiming that it is not possible has no clue how to do it...

Stop feeding the troll.................................................................................................................................

shvrdavid posted at 5:03 PM Thu, 20 April 2023 - #4462893

Stop feeding the troll.................................................................................................................................

Ohh come on ! a little humor once in a while does not hurt anyone, no reason taking all things that seriously. Btw it is always nice having good conversations even if there are different aspects about them, it is what makes us humans. Also it does not cause any Damage bringing a little live in a place. A decade ago remember? there was some activities, today you only read, Sugar and sweet stuff. BTW I do not like her she got to big "boobs" and something is wrong with that face ..... see that is just a honest meaning but does not mean that all feel the same. 

Giving a personal Impression does not mean that it is to troll, just because someone else has a different aspect about it " Right ? " It was just a little Humor .......

The OP is no longer listening to any advice. It's all been said. This thread is done