No.  And since the partial images get put on the first row I don't see any
feasible way of simply chroma-keying the black backgrounds out, which if you
had any black in the scene itself would also get blanked out anyway.  The
non-descript background might be clear if Alpha channeled too but once again
there's the problem with the partial image showing up in the wrong place, so
I see no way as is to compile them together with whole images.
Would need a different method of image production, I think might be the only
potential answer.  Seems like the idea about a whole image remaining for
each subsequent partial render would go nicely with this concept.

Bob

Fabian Brau <fab### [at] umhacbe> wrote in message
news:3819A015.128291F5@umh.ac.be...
> Hello,
>
> I have seen long time ago that one can render only a part of an image
> (you put some command in the command line). This is really cool to
> render some animation, for example:
>
> you have an image with a door, when you click on the door (this is a
> program), it open. But just the door move not the whole scene, so you
> render only this part of the picture -> gain of render time and gain of
> animation size. But suppose that you have an image 320*240, you render a
> just a part of it with the size 100*200, the image you ontain is still a
> 320*240 but with black color around the part of the image: you don't
> obtain a 100*200 image. Ok with PSP or corel photo paint it is easy to
> get only the relevant part of the image but this take much time because
> you must work on each image before construct the animation. It is
> possible to render and GET only the relevant part of the image?
>
> Thanks
>
> Fabian.

Post a reply to this message