0
$\begingroup$

My script seems to be taking a very long time to write to disk a .jpg file. The output should be about 1.5-2.0mb in size and shouldn't take more than a minute or two to write to disk.

Monitoring task manager, I notice Blender doing the following:

(a) before printing, Blender uses 40-50% of the CPU and about 1GB of RAM

(b) once printing starts, CPU usage drops to <1% and RAM balloons to 5GB.

Suggestions?


def Print_image(outputfilepath,outputformat):

    for area in bpy.context.screen.areas: 
        if area.type == 'VIEW_3D':
            space = area.spaces.active
            space.shading.type = 'RENDERED'
    bpy.context.scene.render.image_settings.file_format=outputformat
    bpy.context.scene.render.filepath = outputfilepath
    bpy.ops.render.render(use_viewport = True, write_still=True)
```
|improve this question
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Please show your code or at least what API calls you use. $\endgroup$ – Robert Gützkow Sep 13 '19 at 16:02
  • $\begingroup$ @rjg code has been added to the original question. $\endgroup$ – vndep Sep 13 '19 at 16:11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Just to say, the more correct term is 'rendering' not 'printing'. $\endgroup$ – Ray Mairlot Sep 13 '19 at 16:41
1
$\begingroup$

It takes long because you're rendering the image using bpy.ops.render.render, not just saving an existing image as .jpeg.

|improve this answer
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ What's a more efficient way to do it? $\endgroup$ – vndep Sep 13 '19 at 16:20
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @vndep Before I can answer that, the question is what are you trying to do? Do you want to save an existing image, e.g. a texture or an already completed render to disk? Do you want to start rendering and then save the result (that's what your script currently does)? $\endgroup$ – Robert Gützkow Sep 13 '19 at 16:22
1
$\begingroup$

I'm not sure if this will help, but I have a very slow computer and have also had trouble with rendering. If nothing else works, check out this link to BlenderGrid. I gotta say they're pretty nice! They have pretty cheap prices too. https://blendergrid.com?aff=ovwnhtzt

|improve this answer
$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

It turns out that the problem was in the python script.

Specifically, the camera's positioning was determined algorithmically and - in this case - was 200m from the object. Consequently, blender spent a lot of time attempting to draw a huge field of view.

Reducing the distance to a maximum of 20m (and then adjusting the focal length to get the correct framing of the area of interest) solved the problem.

|improve this answer
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.