Ok. Not a fascinating image, but my first play with motion blur. I'm really
pleased. It's part of a 50 frame anim which I've yet to render... and at 50
mins per frame on my p200, I'm not looking forward to it... hehe

I'll post it at my site when it's done.


All the best,

Andy Cocker

--
---------------------------------------------------------------
www.mariner9.net

..... for my music and graphics.
---------------------------------------------------------------
'I spilled spot remover on my dog. He's gone now. '
'I went to a restaurant that serves "breakfast at any time."
So I ordered french toast during the Renaissance. '

 - Steven Wright.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'motion_test.jpg' (7 KB)

Preview of image 'motion_test.jpg'

Well, I was just experimenting further, and I found that by replacing the
4x4 area light with a point light, the render time per frame fell from 50
mins to 9 mins! No way did I expect the area_light to hit render time so
badly. Must be the way the motion_blur is calculated. Anyhow, the good news
is that it looks like my anim will be a fairly painless render after all.

Also, jpeg really hurts these two images and I'm not sure why. Previous post
was at 85%, and this one was saved at 100%.

Andy Cocker

---------------------------------------------------------------
www.mariner9.net

..... for my music and graphics.
---------------------------------------------------------------
'I spilled spot remover on my dog. He's gone now. '
'I went to a restaurant that serves "breakfast at any time."
So I ordered french toast during the Renaissance. '

 - Steven Wright.
"BigCeef" <big### [at] mariner9fsnetcouk> wrote in message
news:39ea59d7@news.povray.org...
> Ok. Not a fascinating image, but my first play with motion blur. I'm
really
> pleased. It's part of a 50 frame anim which I've yet to render... and at
50
> mins per frame on my p200, I'm not looking forward to it... hehe
>
> I'll post it at my site when it's done.
>
>
> All the best,
>
> Andy Cocker
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> www.mariner9.net
>
> ..... for my music and graphics.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> 'I spilled spot remover on my dog. He's gone now. '
> 'I went to a restaurant that serves "breakfast at any time."
> So I ordered french toast during the Renaissance. '
>
>  - Steven Wright.
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'motion_test.jpg' (30 KB)

Preview of image 'motion_test.jpg'

"BigCeef" <big### [at] mariner9fsnetcouk> wrote in message
news:39ea72f0@news.povray.org...
| Well, I was just experimenting further, and I found that by replacing the
| 4x4 area light with a point light, the render time per frame fell from 50
| mins to 9 mins! No way did I expect the area_light to hit render time so
| badly. Must be the way the motion_blur is calculated. Anyhow, the good
news
| is that it looks like my anim will be a fairly painless render after all.
|
| Also, jpeg really hurts these two images and I'm not sure why. Previous
post
| was at 85%, and this one was saved at 100%.

The red background, bad thing for jpg type (lossy) compression.
The blurring looks good.  Not terrible at 9 minutes a frame, not wonderfully
quick either.  As I understand it the blur is pretty much a multiple render,
no real optimization I don't think anyway.  I'm sure more of such animations
would be tried by people were it fast.  Good luck on it.

Bob

Post a reply to this message

"Bob H."
<per### [at] aolcom?subject=PoV-News:%20&body=Relating%20to%20POV-Ray:%2
0> wrote in message news:39ea8227@news.povray.org...
> The red background, bad thing for jpg type (lossy) compression.
> The blurring looks good.  Not terrible at 9 minutes a frame, not
wonderfully
> quick either.  As I understand it the blur is pretty much a multiple
render,
> no real optimization I don't think anyway.  I'm sure more of such
animations
> would be tried by people were it fast.  Good luck on it.

Thanks for the info Bob. I got your post when only 4 frames into the anim,
so I was able to alter the background colour.
Yeah, a multiple render I believe, the object is parsed many times, 25 in
this case. Maybe overkill, but I wanted super-smooth blur.

All the best,

Andy Cocker
---------------------------------------------------------------
www.mariner9.net

..... for my music and graphics.
---------------------------------------------------------------
'I spilled spot remover on my dog. He's gone now. '
'I went to a restaurant that serves "breakfast at any time."
So I ordered french toast during the Renaissance. '

 - Steven Wright.

Post a reply to this message

Not bad! My tests with tornados has me using 150+ samples for the blur. More
because I didn't want to use a high fidelity object for the funnel. When I
was doing props I kept the count between 16 and 32.

Grim

Post a reply to this message

BigCeef wrote:

> Well, I was just experimenting further, and I found that by replacing the
> 4x4 area light with a point light, the render time per frame fell from 50
> mins to 9 mins! No way did I expect the area_light to hit render time so
> badly. Must be the way the motion_blur is calculated.

Dude try 16 point lights & U will see that area lights are implemented as point
lights - or just rifle through the docs/src
--
Bye
Pabs

Post a reply to this message

BigCeef wrote:
> 
> Ok. Not a fascinating image, but my first play with motion blur. I'm really
> pleased. It's part of a 50 frame anim which I've yet to render... and at 50
> mins per frame on my p200, I'm not looking forward to it... hehe
> 

This method of motion blurring is useful for still images. But IMO it is a lot
of wasted effort for animations, where motion exists across frames anyway.
Here, a much more practical solution is to render the frames without motion
blur, and then average a number of consecutive frames together to get the
blurring. One utility that can do this is Warp's Targa averager:
http://www.students.tut.fi/~warp/PovUtils/average/

-- 
Margus Ramst

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

Post a reply to this message

"Margus Ramst" <mar### [at] peakeduee> wrote in message
news:39EAECAB.FD3EE0AA@peak.edu.ee...

> This method of motion blurring is useful for still images. But IMO it is a
lot
> of wasted effort for animations, where motion exists across frames anyway.
> Here, a much more practical solution is to render the frames without
motion
> blur, and then average a number of consecutive frames together to get the
> blurring. One utility that can do this is Warp's Targa averager:
> http://www.students.tut.fi/~warp/PovUtils/average/


Yeah, I agree...that's the method I've always used previously...I just
wanted to try this out.

The anim's finished, and can be seen in slightly modified form, at:

www.mariner9.fsnet.co.uk/Art/motion-test.htm

All the best,

Andy Cocker
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
www.mariner9.net

..... for my music and graphics.
---------------------------------------------------------------
'I spilled spot remover on my dog. He's gone now. '
'I went to a restaurant that serves "breakfast at any time."
So I ordered french toast during the Renaissance. '

 - Steven Wright.

Post a reply to this message

I can hear it "Whirling" now... =)




BigCeef wrote:

> Ok. Not a fascinating image, but my first play with motion blur. I'm really
> pleased. It's part of a 50 frame anim which I've yet to render... and at 50
> mins per frame on my p200, I'm not looking forward to it... hehe
>
> I'll post it at my site when it's done.
>
> All the best,
>
> Andy Cocker
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> www.mariner9.net
>
> ..... for my music and graphics.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> 'I spilled spot remover on my dog. He's gone now. '
> 'I went to a restaurant that serves "breakfast at any time."
> So I ordered french toast during the Renaissance. '
>
>  - Steven Wright.
>
>  [Image]

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:21:02 +0800, Pabs wrote:
>BigCeef wrote:
>
>> Well, I was just experimenting further, and I found that by replacing the
>> 4x4 area light with a point light, the render time per frame fell from 50
>> mins to 9 mins! No way did I expect the area_light to hit render time so
>> badly. Must be the way the motion_blur is calculated.
>
>Dude try 16 point lights & U will see that area lights are implemented as point
>lights - or just rifle through the docs/src

Not true.  Try looking at the specular highlight of one sometime.  Or try 
looking at the render time with shadows off.

-- 
Ron Parker   http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
My opinions.  Mine.  Not anyone else's.

Post a reply to this message