"Tony[B]" wrote:
> > global_settings { motion_blur SAMPLES, clock_delta*(1-1/SAMPLES) }
>
> Doesn't work for me... MegaPOV just stops.

Did you turn on animation? The method works only for animations.

> If I use 1 instead of clock_delta*... it's happy.

But that's not efficient! :-o

Greetings,

Rune
--
\ Include files, tutorials, 3D images, raytracing jokes,
/ The POV Desktop Theme, and The POV-Ray Logo Contest can
\ all be found at http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated October 9)
/ Also visit http://www.povrayusers.org

Post a reply to this message

"Warp" wrote:
>   I think that internal motion blur is always faster

When you do exaggerated motion blur completely internally, some motion blur
samples in one frame are identical to some samples in the next frame. Doing
the same samples twice or more is a waste of time. To optimise speed, the
unique samples should be done internally, and the "overlapping" samples
should be done externally.

Rune
--
\ Include files, tutorials, 3D images, raytracing jokes,
/ The POV Desktop Theme, and The POV-Ray Logo Contest can
\ all be found at http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated October 9)
/ Also visit http://www.povrayusers.org

Post a reply to this message

In article <39ee17b3@news.povray.org>, "Rune" <run### [at] inamecom> 
wrote:

> When you do exaggerated motion blur completely internally, some 
> motion blur samples in one frame are identical to some samples in the 
> next frame. Doing the same samples twice or more is a waste of time. 
> To optimise speed, the unique samples should be done internally, and 
> the "overlapping" samples should be done externally.

If you have an animation, that is. You can use motion blur to do the 
supersampling, and frame averaging to exaggerate the blur. If you are 
doing a still, frame averaging combined with motion blur would be less 
efficient, since you have to recalculate things that don't change.

-- 
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/

<><

Post a reply to this message

"Chris Huff" wrote:
> If you have an animation, that is.

Quote from my original message:
"How do you make motion blur in animations as fast as possible?"
                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> You can use motion blur to do the supersampling, and frame
> averaging to exaggerate the blur.

Yes, exactly.

> If you are doing a still, frame averaging combined with
> motion blur would be less efficient, since you have to
> recalculate things that don't change.

I was never talking about stills.

But since a still image can be considered an animation with only one frame,
my method still applies. (Averaging one frame is of no use, so use internal
motion blur only.)

Greetings,

Rune
--
\ Include files, tutorials, 3D images, raytracing jokes,
/ The POV Desktop Theme, and The POV-Ray Logo Contest can
\ all be found at http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated October 9)
/ Also visit http://www.povrayusers.org

Post a reply to this message

> Sounds like a bug...what version are you using? The latest is 0.6a.

I pride myself on always having the latest versions of everything. :)

> Have you tried something like this?

Nope. I just copied and pasted it from what Rune showed.

Post a reply to this message

Rune wrote:
> 
> How do you make motion blur in animations as fast as possible?
> 
> Well, there's two ways to make motion blur.
> 
> The internal method is to use MegaPOV's motion blur.
> The external method is to use a program to average the frames
> outputted by POV-Ray.

Hey!  I used POV-Ray to average the frames output by POV-Ray.
Does that count as a third method?

Regards,
John
-- 
ICQ: 46085459

Post a reply to this message

In article <39ee2436@news.povray.org>, "Rune" <run### [at] inamecom> 
wrote:

> "Chris Huff" wrote:
> > If you have an animation, that is.
> 
> Quote from my original message:
> "How do you make motion blur in animations as fast as possible?"
>                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I guess I really need to keep the subjects straight...you are right, of 
course.

-- 
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/

<><

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> 
>   I think that internal motion blur is always faster unless all the scene
> is moving. This is because only part of the image has to be extra-calculated
> instead of the whole image (as happens when using the external method).
>   If all the scene is moving, then both methods may be as slow.
> 

However, internal motion blur (as implemented in MegaPOV) uses more memory -
often significantly more.
And if the whole scene is moving, I'm pretty sure the frame averaging method is
somewhat faster, since there is no additional overhead of checking the
time-stamps.

-- 
Margus Ramst

Personal e-mail: mar### [at] peakeduee
TAG (Team Assistance Group) e-mail: mar### [at] tagpovrayorg

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 21:29:18 -0400, John VanSickle
<van### [at] erolscom> wrote:

>Hey!  I used POV-Ray to average the frames output by POV-Ray.
>Does that count as a third method?

Same here. I even posted some code to do it IIRC. And Bill Marrs said
it was legal for the IRTC so you're safe there.


Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] usanet
TAG      e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg

Post a reply to this message

"John VanSickle" wrote:
> Hey!  I used POV-Ray to average the frames output by POV-Ray.
> Does that count as a third method?

No. The difference is if the motion blur is done IN the calculations of the
images or AFTER the calculations of the images. Which program is used
doesn't matter.

Rune
--
\ Include files, tutorials, 3D images, raytracing jokes,
/ The POV Desktop Theme, and The POV-Ray Logo Contest can
\ all be found at http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated October 9)
/ Also visit http://www.povrayusers.org

Post a reply to this message