Maximum resolution supported in blender?

Hi,

I have been working on a proj and my client wants to render the work at 1500mm (150cm) at 300 dpi that makes the resolution in access of 20000x20000 would it be possible to render it with Blender.

Blender however does not let to go beyond 10000x10000 is there a way around to this any one might be aware of.

Thanks for any help,

Gaurav

I might add my own question here as it seems relevant :

rendering by parts (4X4) at a maximum setting of 10 000 X 10 000 I really end up with a 5 000 X 5000 image… this being confirmed by viewing in many different apps.

Jean

If you can’t find any other way, it’s probably just a simple constant/variable you can change easily in the code, and recompile fo ryour own version of blender. It probably exists to keep people from acidentally setting the resolution to 999999999999999999999x99999999999999999999999999999 and then rendering, but this isn’t a problem anymore as esc works better now. Talk to the devs if you can’t code :slight_smile:

That doesn’t happen to me - are you sure you don’t have Blender set to render at 50%?

As for the limit, I’m not sure why there’s no easy way to override them. It’s the same with the limit of 6 in the subdivisions. I think Dracarys is right, you’d probably have to change the source code and recompile.

Alright, that’s it… I’m going to sleep.

:expressionless:

Jean

how about, render in 10,000 x 10,000, then use the gimp to scale up to 20,000 x 20,000

your clients may never know

is this huge and ugly image signature really necessary???

That’s a pretty bad work ethic, besides if they do find out then that risks losing a lot of money in the future.

Heheh, do the reverse on the sig. Scaling up by double is fine for viewing on a machine whose monitor resolution only goes up to 1024x768 or thereabouts but on a billboard, it’s well noticeable.

IamInnocent
I am not sure if field rendering will work.

Dracarys I was thinking of that possibility. I hope if there is no othere way then I have to go that route. Any way Then my cliet have Powerbook and I have Fedora so he also have to complie and this is another prob.

OsXrules
Yeah its not on 50%. The limit imposed on entering the value of resolution itself is limited to 10000x10000

nerdyneo
Yeah kill mee… instead :smiley:

shbaz
rightoo…

Well ok the I will head to yafray forums I hope it can do that thingy. An will also try out the blender forums.

thanks guy’s for all your help and comments.

Gaurav

Fiel rendering is for TV, rendering the even numbered horizontal lines in one pass the the odd numbered ones, as (analog) TV does display its images. That’s not what I was using.

What I was doing was rendering in parts : it’s easier on memory for large files and avoiding disk swapping can only speed up the process. At 20 000 X 20 000, if you ever succeed doing it (let us know) you may want to use rendering by parts.

Jean

Is your client absolutely certain on demanding 20000x20000? If it’s for a large poster (1500mm), it’s probably not absolutely necessary to print at 300dpi, unless for some reason you will be viewing it up close. Generally, people will stand pretty far back when they’re looking at a big poster like that and dropping it down to 150dpi wouldn’t be noticeable. Many large posters are printed at less than 300dpi for this reason, and because of the fact that it’s hard to scan that much detail out of photographs, even medium format.

Sorry, that answer was for Iaminnocent.

Anyway, if you want to use Blender, you could just position the camera so that it renders a fraction of your image by moving the camera closer to the models. Then move the camera in a planar fashion always rendering at 10000x10000. You can get infinite resolution that way.

For example, place camera at x,y = -1,1 render at 10000x10000
move camera to x,y = 1,1 render
then x,y = -1,-1 render
finally x,y = 1,-1 render

Then you have a 40000x40000 image. If the camera is skew, i.e. not aligned with any axis then you would either have to calculate the positions or perhaps move the camera in its local axes.

Note, the above example is fairly meaningless, I was just explaining how you might move the camera. You have to make sure that the views are close enough together or you won’t be able to join them up later. It’s probably ok for them to overlap as they should merge perfectly. You could clean up any mistakes in a 2d image editor.

Something I’m curious about is why 2D images need such high quality when IMAX cinema quality is only 4096x2048.

IamInnocent
Sorry for using wrong term I was actualy refering to parts rendering.

Ok I also do not know how to do that. Can you explain the process to me.

broken
Yeah thats the kind of logic went to my mind at first. But I never saked him (client) about that. I think I better let him know the constraints in blender and let him decide what he wants.

osxrules

Something I’m curious about is why 2D images need such high quality when IMAX cinema quality is only 4096x2048.

:smiley: Thats freaking right.!! :slight_smile: But the fact is that eyes behave differently when watching a screen and print medium.

Oh here is one of the earlier test renders. It is not complete yet ( :< lots of other thing need to be added) .

http://www.ironcode.com/gog/ganesh-samlple1-mark.jpg

thanks for insight guys,

Gaurav

If you’re going to do this, it would probably be a good idea to do some test prints to demonstrate (for both yourself and the client). There’s the chance that it will look perfectly acceptable at 150dpi, but the client may like the sound of the larger numbers.

Another thing which I’m sure you’re aware of, is that as a last resort you can always render at 10k x 10k, resize up to perhaps 15k x 15x or so in Photoshop and do some manual sharpening and tweaking. It won’t be as good as a render straight out at that res, but may end up being a bit nicer than straight 150dpi.

Or if all else fails you could composite.

Hi Blendermens !

I think that the Osxrules method is the best one. I Use this method in the real world to make very high resolution digital photos. With this method and using my Minolta 5 Mpixels camera, I make 10 Mpixels and even sometimes 20 Mpixels posters. Usualy, outside and in large areas, I only rotate the camera. Inside, you have to displace it in order to avoid geometrical distorsion of close objects.

  • With blender, I’ advise you to make a plane, subdivise it if you need more than 4 pictures to make your poster at the needed resolution.

  • Put a camera and make the plane a parent of this camera.

  • Apply Duplivert .

  • Select the plane and Make Dupli Real with CTRL+SHIFT+A.

  • Select all the new cameras and make the plane parent of them.

  • Select each camera and make some fast low quality rendering to see the overlapping between the different point of view and resize the plane to set the merges.

  • Then, you can render at the maximal resolution.

Gook luck !

Philippe.

broken
shbaz
Roubal

Thanks for the comments and suggestions. I had posted this question at other forms also and I got reply from eeshlo at yafray forum and I belive going the yafray path will be much better as I have the advantage of rendering at selected resolution. Generate the xml and render it at command line will save memory and time, but still memory requirements will be huge.

And also I got reply from the bender.org form that It just might be possible to increase the default render size from the code and recompile blender.

Anyway lets see what is decided in the end. But no matter what happens blenderheads always come out with interesting solutions. I think Roubal’s method was really interesting. Thanks Roubal for sharing. :slight_smile: