Its so odd, it has never happened before. It has a weird graphic on the active object editor, and when playing the animation half way the screen turns whiteI tried using standard, and it stays the same too.
Screenshot_1.jpg
Its so odd, it has never happened before. It has a weird graphic on the active object editor, and when playing the animation half way the screen turns white
Screenshot_1.jpg
Sadly, that did not work
Maybe a corrupted image file? Can you duplicate the image file and try reloading into Fusion?
I'll try, all of the images are straight from a 3DS Max PNG render. Also, the images are 2000x2000 with 60 frames.
ah, that's the problem. The images are too large and you have too many of them for Fusion to handle. You will need to optimize your animations.
Optimized the graphics, and now... Out Of Memory. I can't even restart Clickteam without losing my work. Its so odd! Also, I have 16GB of ram, so memory couldn't be the problem! I mean, it can.
Fusion is a 32 bit program which doesn't recognize the larger memory capabilities of a 64 bit program.
Sadly, there isn't a way around this aside from playing an external movie, at least not that I am aware of.
When you are playing a frame, if you get around 1.6gb of ram and upwards Fusion can't handle it.
To the best of my knowledge you only have the option of loading in an animation 1 frame at a time, then saving your work, reloading your active and adding another frame, save, repeat. Even then, your runtime will most likely fall apart at the seams.
Images that high in resolution and that many at a time is a very, very bad idea and you won't have good results.
Good news: Fixed the memory error, I closed Clickteam and opened it back up. Sadly, some of my work was lost. However, the images are now 2000x1024. I guess this helped, because now it can handle much longer and or faster animations. It stays at 650 MB too, so I have some room to work with.
Cut the height in half like you did, and, as is to be expected, the amount of memory it will take is cut in half (more-or-less). What you might not have been able to guess is that you coincidentally chose a power of 2 resolution to change it to, which is usually the optimal resolution to use for images (anything else, and it will still technically be the next largest power of 2, wasting either a little space or a lot of space depending on the situation).
I would cut the width in half by splitting the images then attach the two together with a fast loop. See if that improves memory and/or performance. It will be best in the long run. Exceeding an image of 1024 by either width or height can cause significant performance issues eventually.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote