480x360 AA0.3 no DOF = 2 min 15 sec
480x360 blur_samples 45 = 13 min 47 sec
480x360 blur_samples 450 = 35 min 47 sec

As I discovered, using blur_samples 45 looked almost, if not just as good as the 450.
So
this was perhaps not the best choice of image upon which to demonstrate. Something
with
more objects further from the focal point would have been better.

----------------------
Andy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
--The Home Of Lunaland--
--visit my POV-Ray gallery--
--listen to my music--
www.acocker.freeserve.co.uk


Margus Ramst <mar### [at] peakeduee> wrote in message news:37192bdf.0@news.povray.org...
> I never doubted this could be done. But what's the render time? Is it worth
> it?
>
> Margus
>
> Andrew Cocker wrote in message <37190e69.0@news.povray.org>...
> >Hi all,
> >
> >    I just wanted to post this image to demonstrate to those of you that
> don't already
> >know that it is possible to get beautifully smooth DOF by cranking the
> blur_samples up
> >*much* higher than the figure of 45 as used in the demonstration file
> focalb1.pov. I'd
> >always assumed that this figure was as high as was neccessary, and the
> grainy blurring was
> >all that could be expected, but in this simple image I have attatched, the
> DOF is very
> >smooth. I used blur_samples 450 ( which may be overkill ) for this pic.
> >    I hope it pleasantly surprises some of you, as it did me.
> >
> >all the best,
> >
> >--
> >----------------------
> >Andy
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------
> >-
> >--The Home Of Lunaland--
> >--visit my POV-Ray gallery--
> >--listen to my music--
> >www.acocker.freeserve.co.uk
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Post a reply to this message