So which method gives you a smaller thermo?
I want to make a flat rectangle
1. Make a small cube that matches the thickness of my rectangle and stretch it out to make the flat sheet
2. Make a large cube the size of my rectangle and delete the back and sides of it to make the flat sheet.
Or because the shape is the same does it use up the same amount?
-
Hi.
The cost of a sculpt in terms of memory is amount of primitives used to create it, including negative ones. So using your stretch method is cheapest,
But the difference is so small it won't make a difference, you'd have to be using over 10,000 edits at least before you'd remotely notice it.
What costs more is how detailed it is, so make sure you sculpt with the loosest brush you can or use the sculpt detail tool after.
Additionally, use as many clones as possible as unique sculpts eat more memory.
John -
John, there appears to be more to it than you describe.
I just did some experiments. I placed a default cube. That resulted in 1% graphics on the thermo. Scaling before or after stamping made no difference.
Next I stamped a cube then used stretch to make it really big afterwards. The thermo shot up to 22%. Nothing else in the scene.
Finally I made a default cube but smeared many many edits onto it. The thermo went up to 3% but after I cut away some of these edits so less of them contributed to the visible sculpt, it went back to 1%
In other words, you can have a very detailed small sculpt with low thermo and a very large simple sculpt with high thermo.
It'd be great to get clarification on how this works. Not just for thermo management but also because you can get visual inconsistency between sculpts if you're not careful how you create them due to the visible difference in resolution.
Cheers -
I did one further test. Default cube with many edits, far more than before, but this time none that increased its initial volume, only subtracting. The thermo still stayed at 1%. I'd conclude that edits are cheap but sculpt volume is very significant.
-
Hi,
We certainly need to explain the thermo more.
What is a red herring here is there are actually lots of thermos under the hood, and the thermo you see is just the one that is most full.
So edits cost a bit, but not much at all, basically a cube will cost as much as a detailed head (the head like 0.01% more), as we don't use polygons.
Volume actually has zero cost difference, big or small it's identical.
You can test this by sculpting say an apple. Then clone the apple and scale it up or shrink it down.
However, the closer you are to something the LOD (level of detail) code kicks in (this is an optimisation to auto reduce sculpt detail the further something is away from the camera)
So if you make something huge it's a bit like being really close to it. So you might see an increase in the graphics thermo ( the frame rate) which is different to memory (detail and amount of objects)
Lastly each object can be sculpted very tight or very loose.
When you first stamp down I. Sculpt mode it sets the detail level at that scale, so then if you start sculpting bigger (compared to just scaling up) it's like increasing the sculpt detail massively.
Imagine it like placing down a Lego block and then adding more Lego blocks to make a house, maybe you use 100 blocks.
Or placing down a Lego block, then scaling it up to a Duplo block before you carry on and you can make your house in 20 blocks.
Hope this helps a bit explaining what's going on
John -
To clarify my point about volume, no scaling up doesn't make a difference but using the stretch tool to get a bigger shape (or extending an existing shape with more stamps) certainly does. So its the original volume of the shape so to speak, not its scaled volume that matters. That's just based on the tests I did at least. That behaviour you describe about how the initial stamp sets the resolution for the sculpt is obviously key to managing the thermo for sculpts.
Please sign in to leave a comment.