|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
"Margus Ramst" wrote:
> Rune wrote:
> > If the camera moves, you cannot get correct results with
> > MegaPOV, so it does not make sense to compare the render
> > times in that case.
>
> IIRC you can get correct results by putting your entire
> scene in an union and moving it instead of the camera.
That's rather easy if you just want to fake a linearly moving camera, but it
can be difficult for other movements, and sometimes impossible, for example
if you want to change the camera angle.
> You're right, of course.
> Of course in practice, the motion blur effect is often exaggerated
> for artistic purposes. And if shutter time is greater than
> clock_delta you _can_ reuse old inter-frame samples and thus get
> by with less samples overall.
True.
Hmm, actually I think it can become even faster if you combine the internal
and external motion blur.
In MegaPOV use shutter time equal to clock_delta and don't render any
inter-frames.
Now, if you want to exaggerate the motion blur, just average the already
blurred frames externally to get them even more blurred. (The trail of blur
should match up correctly, but I haven't tested it.)
Of course that way the shutter time will always be a multiple of the
clock_delta, but I don't think that's a problem.
I'll test it now...
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
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |