Page 1 of 1

Adaptive Motion Blur??

Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2003 8:12 am
by Mel_Q
Thanks in advance for your patience in reading. :)
Let's face it. Some frames in our animations need mblurring, while others don't. I usually get around this by splitting the anim up, mblurring the scenes and shots that need it, and resequencing them.
Seems obvious that this could be simplified in a number of ways, but I'm lucky to code a box that says 'hi' that works (6809E ASM and im there :lol: ). A new option in the sequencer, the IPO window, or even some type of frame to frame comparison algorithm with a user definable threshold - any of these could save a user a lot of time.
The simplest is probably going to be the best solution...
Any thoughts or hints on this?

Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2003 10:35 am
by alltaken
i think the sequencer should be used for things like this.

it would be great to have that kind of feature in the sequencer, but currently you can actually sequence it, create another scene and link all objects.

now set the second scene to mblur and the first to not mblur, then sequence between the two scenes as you normally would!!!!!!!

brillient and problem solved.


but i also think there should be another Mblur option where you say blur compared to scene where the camera stays in the same position for all the mblur passes (e.g. the camera does not move with the IPO curve assigned to it)


so all the background is NOT blured but any moving objects within the scene are blured!!!!!!

or be able to Mblur individual layers/objects!!!






Alltaken

Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2003 11:27 pm
by ThrashDog6
I like that idea. You could tag a vertice as a refernce point, then check if it moved far enough to warrant a motion blur. Here's what the logic would look like, I think:

If vertice1motion > 2 pixels then motionblur = ON

pretty simple. Don't know what it would look like in actual CODE, but...

Posted: Fri May 09, 2003 7:47 am
by LukeW
It would be good if motion blur could be set to any number from 2 to 20 or more. Sometimes 16 isn't enough. And it would be good if oversampling (OSA) could be adjusted independently... e.g. I might want a little edge smoothing but a lot of motion blur... normally when I have a lot of mblur samples, I would either have no edge smoothing (which can be noticeable if there is a lot of movement) or a lot of both.

Posted: Sat May 10, 2003 2:26 am
by ideasman
I agree - 2c, I think some of the rendering opts could also become a property of the camera and then could be keyframed.

mblur, blur factor, exposure, res, oversampling and mabe some more.

In an animation diff cameras could be used for different shots, for some shots hq settings would be needed others could have no aa, mblur etc. and this would cut down render times.

I thought I said that :)

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2003 5:52 am
by Mel_Q
alltaken wrote:i think the sequencer should be used for things like this.

it would be great to have that kind of feature in the sequencer, but currently you can actually sequence it, create another scene and link all objects.

now set the second scene to mblur and the first to not mblur, then sequence between the two scenes as you normally would!!!!!!!

brillient and problem solved.
I've been doing it that way since I bought the original c-key :)
The point is, it seems this could be automated. If it can save some time
(so a professional can make a deadline much easier) then why not?

Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2003 2:17 am
by hanzo
ya know I hate that problem, and I think user definable threshold is
great! 1 question is there a way to use motion blur to simulate Dof :wink:
I think we could under the same prinsaples of mblur?

sort of...

Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2003 6:30 am
by Mel_Q
Using mblur to simulate depth of field is very common.
Check this out:
http://www.elysiun.com/tutorials.php?id=2


Although the setup is fairly simple in theory, it's still way too much to do
to accomplish one task :roll: .