Crash at rendering with 2.36 for high resolution image.

Blender's renderer and external renderer export

Moderators: jesterKing, stiv

Post Reply
ROUBAL
Posts: 0
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 3:39 am
Location: FRANCE
Contact:

Crash at rendering with 2.36 for high resolution image.

Post by ROUBAL »

Hi !

I am rendering a very detailed scene.

No raytracing. Gaussian filter enabled.

First I tried at 4000 x 3000, 5 x5 parts, and every thing was OK.

Now I am trying to render the same image for a Poster.

I have chosen a 8000 x 6000 pixels resolution, and rendering by parts.

I have tried with 7 x 7 and 8 x 8.

The number of vertices is 2 555 303.

The memory required by Blender (displayed in the header bar) is 832.7 MB.

I am running Blender 2.36 on a Pentium 4 - 3GHz with 2 GB Dual Channel Kingston RAM.

Video Card ATI Radeon 9250.

This computer runs under Windows XP Home Edition.

Blender crashes at the end of the rendering and the Console displays this message :

Calloc returns nill: len = 192 000 000

Do you know what it means and what is the trouble ?

Thanks in advance.

Philippe.

stiv
Posts: 0
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 7:58 am
Location: 45N 86W

Post by stiv »

The message means that an attempt to allocate an 192,000,000 byte chunk of memory failed. Off the top of my head, I would say someone is out of memory.

ROUBAL
Posts: 0
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 3:39 am
Location: FRANCE
Contact:

Blender crash at rendering

Post by ROUBAL »

Hi !

Out of memory using rendering by parts on a computer with 2 GB Ram, it is strange...

Since I posted this topic, I have been told to try a rendering using the command line, by someone on Elysiun.com :

I could render sucessfully my image.

I will do this way in the future for High resolution images, but there is probably a bug somewhere.

Philippe.

stiv
Posts: 0
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 7:58 am
Location: 45N 86W

Post by stiv »

The error msg is from a system call that tried allocate a big, continuous chunk of memory and failed. Your 2Gig may simply have been chopped into many smaller pieces.

Without looking at source, I suspect that rendering from the command line means not needing huge chunks of memory for image displays. Remember that an image size is roughly 4 * X size * Y size.

ROUBAL
Posts: 0
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 3:39 am
Location: FRANCE
Contact:

2.36 crash at rendering

Post by ROUBAL »

I think you're right.

First I thought that only the video card was concerned by the displayed picture, but the datas must be transfered to the video card by the CPU, probably through the ram... and this may need a non negligible part of it at this moment (the end of the rendering) because the memory is very loaded (image reconstruction).

Philippe

Post Reply