SGI: Computer Graphics

Blender 2.48 - Alpha rev c - "Yafray, FFmpeg, 64 threads" - Page 5

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avid_Matador
The Wikipedia wrote:
Avid Matador was a paint application by Avid Technology targeted at the television and film markets. It ran on Silicon Graphics workstations. The main features were paint, mask creation/rotoscoping, animation and stabilization/tracking. Matador was used on several films, such as Jurassic Park, Forrest Gump and The Mask.

_________________
***********************************************************************
Welcome to ARMLand - 0/0x0d00
running...(sherwood-root 0607201829)
* InfiniteReality/Reality Software, IRIX 6.5 Release *
***********************************************************************
cool!

Image

_________________
:Octane: :Octane2: 2xR12000 400MHz, 4GB RAM, V12
SGI - the legend will never die!!
I've never used Matador in production, but I have toyed around with it. It has a very unique interface - reminds me of 3D Studio for DOS. There's a full-size screenshot in my gallery section.
Runs fine on Fuel , by the way. There was a free download at one time, I think. Details in the sgi newsgroups archives.
I have Matador on one of my O2's and it works fine. Great paint program.

_________________
:O2: :O2: :O2: = Mooseheads!
eMGee wrote:
Elastic Reality is also a very powerful Avid application, I believe it was more or less ‘bundled’ with Matador and/or Media Illusion .


for some time you could get all of it on the softimage site. no lic tho iirc

_________________
r-a-c.de
Elastic Reality is the odd duck of the Avid apps.

It started as an Amiga app that then evolved into a Mac, then a Mac/Windows app, then a Mac/Windows/IRIX app. The functionality is exactly the same though the SGI version can load a LOT larger data sets (128MB of RAM was all a mac of the era could handle). UI wise, they are all pretty similar. I think I still have an old Mac copy.

I would love to see someone recreate Matador on a modern platform like OS X..
creepingfur wrote:
I would love to see someone recreate Matador on a modern platform like OS X..

What makes OS X a "modern platform" ? And why would you want to recreate something from the 1870's on a "modern platform" if modernity is such an advantage ?

Just curious.
hamei wrote:
creepingfur wrote:
I would love to see someone recreate Matador on a modern platform like OS X..

What makes OS X a "modern platform" ? And why would you want to recreate something from the 1870's on a "modern platform" if modernity is such an advantage ?

Just curious.


Nice, I'll bite, because this one is obvious.

What makes OS X a "modern platform" compared to IRIX is active development and support for hardware sold after 2006. The technical merits of any OS are up for debate - but the fact that IRIX doesn't run on any new hardware and probably never will return makes it no longer a "modern platform."

And that's why you'd recreate something on a "modern platform" - to take advantage of the speed and power of new hardware. Plus, while you were at it "recreating," the software would probably emerge from the "1870s" you speak of with modern features as well, possibly by accident (for example support for more modern container, compression, and interchange formats).

At any rate, Matador is an awesome app that I'd love to see stick around in some form or another.

_________________
:0300: <> :0300: :Indy: :1600SW: :1600SW:
hamei wrote:

Just curious.


the age of the platform is irrelevant, that fact that you can get modern software for it is.

_________________
:Skywriter:

DECUS Member 368596
bri3d wrote:
Nice, I'll bite, because this one is obvious.

I probably phrased that poorly. I'm wondering why anyone would want to "recreate" a DOS or Amiga program on a "modern" platform. It's an antique program in an antique paradigm. If modern is so great, then why long for an antique ? Modern is better, right ? Then make a modern program with all the wonderful advances we've seen in software over the past twenty years. I'm sure there must be some. Somewhere.

Quote:
What makes OS X a "modern platform" compared to IRIX is active development and support for hardware sold after 2006.

So the fact that it's actually NeXTStep, introduced in 1990, with pretty icons poured over the top, that has nothing to do with it. I see now. I believe Novell DOS 7 is actively developed and runs fine on new hardware, too. That makes it modern ? If I take a VW bug and slap a fibreglass Ferrari body on top, then it's a supercar ? Groovy, man, groovy.

Quote:
The technical merits of any OS are up for debate - but the fact that IRIX doesn't run on any new hardware and probably never will return makes it no longer a "modern platform."

Most likely correct. To which the answer has to be "Then who gives a rat's ass ?" I refer you to Eliyahu Goldratt, The Goal : "what's the effing point ?" Are we all mostly interested in playing with our peepees or is the hardware / software combination actually supposed to do something useful ? If we have people reminiscing over twenty year old software then obviously someone, somewhere has been missing the point for a long long time.

Or maybe that is the real point : they collect a lot of money which we happily hand over for the privilege of saying "My peepee is 4 ghz, yours is only 3.2 , ha ha ha !" That's so productive. I'm really glad we're an information and service society now.

Quote:
And that's why you'd recreate something on a "modern platform" - to take advantage of the speed and power of new hardware. Plus, while you were at it "recreating," the software would probably emerge from the "1870s" you speak of with modern features as well, possibly by accident (for example support for more modern container, compression, and interchange formats).

You mean, something along the lines of multiple threads and processes, to take advantage of all these dual-core cpu's that are so popular now ? yeah, that'd be nice, wouldn't it ? There's only been common smp operating systems and hardware available for fifteen goddamned years . Maybe in another twenty the software idiots will actually get "modern" and take advantage of the "modern' hardware.

But I wouldn't bet on it.

What I would bet is that the useless software companies we have (yes, Adobe, you get to go to the front of the line) will continue to merrily produce absolute crap and the morons who happily buy it will continue to do so because hey now ! it's modern !

Software is shit. The people who produce that crap should be put to sleep.

skywriter wrote:
the age of the platform is irrelevant, that fact that you can get modern software for it is.

Such as Fireflop, the "modern" browser that locks up the interface if you breathe hard, CS 4 "Creative Suite" with its wonderful modern interface and superlative programming that could bring Blue Gene to her knees but can't even save as pdf, Acrobat Reader for PORTABLE document format that is twelve versions outdated on anything but Winshit XP, Flash (sooo useful, improves my life immeasurably being forced to watch third-graders' artwork) ...

Yeah. Modern software. I feel so deprived having to run this lousy outdated Irix stuff ... Oh, wait ! I don't have to ! For a buck I can get any piece of software made -- but it's not worth the trouble to take it off the shelf because it's crap !

(I'm not entirely kidding. I have boxes full of this garbage that's not even worth the trouble to install. It's like buying an Andy Warhol poster of a soup can. Get it home, stick it on the wall, then what ? Whoopee. Junk, junk, more junk. )
hamei wrote:
If I take a VW bug and slap a fibreglass Ferrari body on top, then it's a supercar ?

Hey! I have a VW Beetle :D One day I'm going upgrade it with a Porsche 911 engine. Better upgrade the suspension too :oops:

I tried to move a Crimson in it once. That didn't fit, or at least not without removing a front seat (like a Mexican taxi :lol: )

_________________
Now this is a deep dark secret, so everybody keep it quiet :)
It turns out that when reset, the WD33C93 defaults to a SCSI ID of 0, and it was simpler to leave it that way... -- Dave Olson, in comp.sys.sgi

Currently in commercial service: Image :Onyx2: (2x) :O3x02L:
In the museum : almost every MIPS/IRIX system.
Wanted : GM1 board for Professional Series GT graphics (030-0076-003, 030-0076-004)
jan-jaap wrote:
Hey! I have a VW Beetle :D One day I'm going upgrade it with a Porsche 911 engine.

Isn't that called a 914 ?

Quote:
(like a Mexican taxi :lol: )

Should have seen me moving ... two electric tricycles piled ten feet high. Then the poor bastards had to carry a gdm90w11 up seven floors :shock: It died up there ... still there, I think. Probably won't come down until the next earthquake :D
I just fired upp my Origin2000 (well half of it) again and was going to try some blender benchmark.

I used the blender-2.48-irix-c.tar.gz which I suppose if for threads >8.
Blender 'autodetects' the number of cpus at start and suggests 8 cpus. My current config has 16 cpus and I can increase the number of threads to 16 (or more) but when rendering starts it still only uses 8. What am I doing wrong?

Also, when I increase number of tiles, I get a maximum of 130 tiles in the test.blend scene. For example 16x16, still gets me 130 tiles.

With the official benchmark version 2.44 I got 02:01.92 rendering time for the test.blend with 8 threads. The goal is to run all 32 cpus/threads.

Origin2000 machine. IRIX 6.5.22m

Code: Select all

16 250 MHZ IP27 Processors
CPU: MIPS R10000 Processor Chip Revision: 3.4
FPU: MIPS R10010 Floating Point Chip Revision: 3.4
Main memory size: 5120 Mbytes
Instruction cache size: 32 Kbytes
Data cache size: 32 Kbytes
Secondary unified instruction/data cache size: 4 Mbytes
Integral SCSI controller 0: Version QL1040B, single ended
Disk drive: unit 1 on SCSI controller 0
Disk drive: unit 2 on SCSI controller 0
CDROM: unit 6 on SCSI controller 0
Integral SCSI controller 1: Version QL1040B, single ended
Integral SCSI controller 6: Version QL1040B (rev. 2), single ended
CDROM: unit 6 on SCSI controller 6
Integral SCSI controller 7: Version QL1040B (rev. 2), single ended
IOC3/IOC4 serial port: tty1
IOC3/IOC4 serial port: tty2
IOC3/IOC4 serial port: tty3
IOC3/IOC4 serial port: tty4
Fast Ethernet: ef2, version 1, module 2, slot io1, pci 2
Integral Fast Ethernet: ef0, version 1, module 1, slot io1, pci 2
Origin BASEIO board, module 1 slot 1: Revision 3
Origin BASEIO board, module 2 slot 1: Revision 4
IOC3/IOC4 external interrupts: 2
IOC3/IOC4 external interrupts: 1

O2 console via 100Mbit ethernet. IRIX 6.5.30m

Code: Select all

CPU: MIPS R12000 Processor Chip Revision: 2.3
FPU: MIPS R12010 Floating Point Chip Revision: 0.0
1 270 MHZ IP32 Processor
Main memory size: 256 Mbytes
Secondary unified instruction/data cache size: 1 Mbyte on Processor 0
Instruction cache size: 32 Kbytes
Data cache size: 32 Kbytes
FLASH PROM version 4.18
Integral SCSI controller 0: Version ADAPTEC 7880
Disk drive: unit 2 on SCSI controller 0
CDROM: unit 4 on SCSI controller 0
Integral SCSI controller 1: Version ADAPTEC 7880
On-board serial ports: tty1
On-board serial ports: tty2
On-board EPP/ECP parallel port
CRM graphics installed
Integral Ethernet: ec0, version 1
Iris Audio Processor: version A3 revision 0
Video: MVP unit 0 version 1.4
with no AV Card or Camera.
Vice: TRE
my recollection is that on IRIX 8 threads was the max. i also thought some attempt was made to address this. 8 came from some dependence on another package that was limited to 8. perhaps you need some updating, or a better answer :)
:Skywriter:

DECUS Member 368596
I thought this problem had been fixed since tbcpp has put the following line in his first post
I bumped the max threads up to 64. Let me know if you want it higher.
maybe it was python had the 8 threads on IRIX as the problem?
:Skywriter:

DECUS Member 368596
I was thinking. Possible number of threads are not always equal to possible number of cpus. The limitation in some of the program components could be the number of cpus.

I run the c-ray benchmark with 512 (and more) threads on 16 cpus.
I do have great memories of playing the quake port on my Onyx RE2 with performance that put my gaming PC at the time to shame.

One thing that always got me is the tank simulator, I can't remember if it was included with a full install of irix or off of one of the IndyZone disks. Shortly after I joined the army I got to use the tank simulator and it was identical to the sgi one. I always figured they had an old SGI Crimson behind the sceans driving it with a custom made cockpit to feel like a Abrams tank.

_________________
:O3000: :O2000: :O3x03R: :hpserv: :Fuel: :O200: :Tezro: :O2: :Indigo: :Octane: :Indigo2: :Indy: :Cube:

Alpha DS40, Power Station, PowerServer 550L, IBM PS/2 L40 (running AIX 1.3), Sun 3/60, Alpha Server 200, VAXstation 4000, and Tadpole SparcBook
This thing is sweet... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE-Fge3gN9w&feature=search

Too bad its Weber/Vettel though.