Migrating Flamingo nxt and materials to a new computer

I have been using Rh/Fl ever since they first came out. I am in the middle of a ship design with many renders when my computer crashed. I have reverted to my old, slow machine while the other was being assessed, and then got a new computer on warranty, without ever getting the dud one back. Rhino 5 installed ok with rego and all, but Flamingo downloaded as nxt5, which looks completely different and doesn’t have the many materials I created, which I urgently need to finish this design and get paid. Has a new Flamingo come out in the last 2 weeks (I have been on holiday as well)? I tried installing NXT from my original disk but that is set up for Rh4 and gets stuck on that before it downloads. How can I get Flamingo nxt with the materials I created for this project, so I can get paid?

1 Like

Never mind. I worked it all out

Backtracking now: … After examining the render images on the new machine I see that many of the materials render differently from my original tweaks. I then copied the old materials library - with my material tweaks - onto my new computer and loaded this as the materials library for my model. Unfortunately the render still excludes my tweaks and produces un-presentable renders. How can I get my original materials back into this model?

Can you email or post the 3dm with all the texture maps embedded? Also post images showing what the scene should render as versus how it does now for you.

Hi Brian,
I appreciate your response.

  1. While I was thinking about how to send this 350mb 3dm file plus another 175mb in 14 attachment files and a 140mb background HDRi, I ran another comparison render and this time it somehow found the correct materials and rendered them perfectly, exactly like with my old machine. I think this issue has thereby thankfully solved itself. I have attached the control image here, which the new machine has duplicated perfectly.
    I would probably have sent the files as a zipped package through Dropbox if you still needed them.

  2. Before I load nxt5, can you tell me whether this will produce the same renders as nxt3?

  3. I found a few months ago that nxt3 has a memory-leak problem, such that when I try to render a video turntable sequence, it would crash with a memory overflow error after about 20 frames (depending on the resolution). I can follow this precisely using the Task Manager >Performance graph, and watch the memory usage graph step up slightly after every frame, until it fills the whole graph and Rhino crashes. I was going to set up a tight render model as a mesh-only model with all the attachments inserted as meshes, with each large mesh optimised down as much as possible. This will be a lot of work, but if this leak has already been fixed in nxt5 I can set up a less-detailed mesh model with higher frame resolution. I would love it to be 1080p at 25fps, but 15fps might have to suffice. What is your suggestion?

Thank you for your help.

I would assume so but I don’t know for certain. You can have both versions installed and switch to nxt 5.0 in the Render drop down menu though to test.

Regarding the memory issue with outputting a turntable animation, did you report this with an example file to tech@mcneel.com ? I’m not aware of the issue and can try to reproduce it but if you have a file that reliably does so, that will be best to see first.

Thank you Brian. In that case I will load v5 and keep v3 for comparison.

Yes, in Jan/Feb I went through a solution process with Scott Davidson, which came to a logical work-around of reducing file size. This is a good work-around for the memory leak but requires a substantial amount of work on my side to reduce this model effectively. I just haven’t had this kind of time to invest yet. I suppose the main issue is what the outcome would be: Currently I can get 28 frames (just over 1 second of video) before Rhino crashes. If I reduce the model from its current size to half (which is possible) the probable result is that I may get 100 or 200, or even 500 frames, which would still be short of the 1500-2000 frames I need for a publishable video. It may work out ok but may also not. As long as the memory leak exists it is a gamble. But when I get the time I will reduce the render model anyway.

I haven’t tested turntable animations yet with nxt 5 but will put it on the list. Perhaps the best thing is to make a simpler test case first and see if the issue persists. If not, it might have something to do with a specific element in the original file that is using more RAM. Please let us know if you see this in another file or the original after optimizing it as Scott explained.