My main business is architectural illustration. I have clients that require their images printed at AO size (sometimes larger) for display and inspection at Appeals and Public Inquiries. Officials and the Public inspect the images not only from a distance but also close up. My clients expect extreme accuracy with their images and in consequence, high resolution is necessary.

Regards Al.

Quote - ........Microsoft's history of laying bug-ridden eggs when introducing a new OS. Vista is expected to be a massive, ugly, tortured beast on the inside with a Mac-like interface on the outside. SS

Exactly.........

Al.

Hi....I have reloaded D/S and can now type a file name to save a render....It wouldn't accept the file name previously.....I reckon AV or Anti Malware processes affected installation.

So, we are getting nearer to be able to use this....the next thing will be how do I get a jpeg background of my choice loaded into the scene?!!

I'm off to experiment again.

Thanks Al.

Yep, a 4400 doesn't work as well with DDR2, whch is why a 4600 is a better choice...(but a 3800 is OK albeit slightly slower)....these work on the 400 multiple rule, whereas the others don't. DDR2 800 works fine.

The 5000 is the truck that hits the guy in front.

What surprises me is that Dell didn't spot this earlier (or did they?) Still....I found out the hard way there....Intel Pentium D 950 based system caught fire (standard case and fans, I guess).

I haven't seen a 950 on the website for some time....wonder why?

Al.

Didn't say it was archaic....but it is interesting that Dell (spit) are already down the AM2/DDR2 route.

And so I can see the truck, I haven't switched to XP Prox64.....

But the DDR2 makes a helluva difference.

Al.

AM2 and DDR2, as you say, shouldn' t play much of a part in the actual programs.....unless of course you play around with the memory bandwidth.

However as it is the way things are going, when it comes to upgrading PCs, many of the old ones will be stuck with DDR and Socket 939......in essence, a bit like all the 32bit laptops that will get chucked away, because it won't be worth upgrading (or possible) them to 64bit.

Also consider how long it has taken our friend Bill Gates to get XP just about working properly......it still isn't fully OK....How long will it take for MS to get a 64bit OS operating satisfactorily?

Al.

 Sticking my bit in......I see nobody has mentioned AM2 and DDR2 Memory yet?

Al.

Yes, you are right....I cannot enter a new name for the file, I only get a Browse option, from which I have to overwrite an existing file.

Regarding Save to another Window.....I get another window with the image, but no Save option...its just a window, but the image isn't too bad.

And again, I cannot use the Save option for Content or Scene.....I am beginning to think I have a corrupt D/S program.......sound like it to you?

Regarding the rendering facility, I have tried Open GL, 3Delight and Hardware (in Advanced) but these only appear to affect the time rather than significant improvements in quality.

I tried the default V3 really just to judge the image quality...to see how sharp the image was...

As yet, I haven't even bothered to import the renders into PShop, because they just aren't good enough....I can do better with my airbrush, in fact I can do better with my paintbrush or magic markers, sorry, Pantones.

If you want to see what I mean, you can go to my website, but to avoid sticking the URL here, we will have to go by private messages/emails...up to you.

I think I will do another D/S and V3 download....maybe I didn't turn off my AV and Malware when I installed it from the desktop.

Thanks Al.

I have been having another mess around. I have set render settings to CUSTOM.

I have set the pixels @ 2000 x 1500.

The SAVE button at the bottom left of the D/S Window does nothing regardless of  whether I am in Content or Scene.

If I render to Active Viewport and SAVE LAST RENDER, I get a really bad image regardless of file type.....say 30kb to 50kb, which is about as much use as a rubber screwdriver.

If I render to a new window, I don't get an option to SAVE the image.

If I render to a FILE, I have to over-rite an existing file, by doing this I have managed to get the full height person saved at a slightly better file size.....171kb (the largest yet!)

Even so, I would expect the image to be better quality than the attached shows when you scroll 'in' to a head shot....to me, there is no sharpness to it ie, foggy....not enough pixel size, I guess?

The image, you will no doubt recognise, is straight out of DAZ Vicki Content, unchanged and just rendered....it took 15 seconds to render.....a bit better than three hours just recently, when a more 'dressed' image was required....and then, the error notice said "Render failed to complete".

Al.

I know exactly what you mean....I sometimes think that the image on my old PC with a CRT monitor looks better than the images on my two lcd flat screen monitors on the big PC, that is until I stuck a similar lcd monitor on the old PC.

I can assure you that it isn't monitor problems and I doubt it is the graphics card, otherwise I think I would have Photoshop problems.

Al

Hi again...

I am aware that Pshop isn't rendering anything....I just mentioned it to show that this PC is quite capable of handling huge files at speed....Your comment re jpegs is noted, but in Photoshop much of what I do is left as psd or Tiff, depending on what I need....However, I have had no success with D/S using Tiffs either.

There is nothing untoward running on the PC other than the OS (XP Pro), normal Windows services etc....and the NVidia Graphics card when it needs it.

I have tried turning off/disabling the AV and Malware programs (which I sometimes do for Pshop) as I am also aware that these sometimes can have an affect on speed....although I would not expect this to show up much on anything other than 'smaller' PCs.

This PC is also networked to another right next to it and have even severed that connection without any noticeable improvement.

If you can bear with me please, I will have another look at an even simpler image later today and post it.

Thanks Al.

Size approx 519x572.

If I increase the pixel size, the render takes ages.

In Photoshop, I am working with files that are 330Mb (large images say, 8000x3500)....It isn't my PC (or I don't see how it could be)

Thnaks Al.

Saving as jpeg (TIFFs no better).....All I am trying to do is save a decent full height image of say, one standing female, no background, so I can use it with other applications.

The jpeg image I get is foggy, jagged edge, which seriously deteriorates in close-up when opened with any imaging program.

A head only close-up in DS will save at approx 137kb and is pretty good and sharp, albeit slightly rough around the edges (which I can get rid of with pShop) Image size is approx 519 x 562 pixels......(full height person similar 572 x 572)

Al.

Well, I tried those settings of Crazy Dawg and I got an image file size of about 24.5kb!

It wasn't very good quality at all.

...if I bring the image closer and crop off the bottom half of the person, I can get the file up to about 100kb.....Even so, it still isn't what I would call good quality.

I have to confess, I am baffled......Any other ideas, please?

Al.

Thanks CrazyDawg....Yes I do have other things running, but I am using a PC with dual core CPU (AMD 64 X2 4600) plus 2G DDR2 RAM (AM2 Motherboard) so it ought to be fast enough.

I have ACDSee.....So I will try your settings and thoughts asap.

Many Thanks Al.