Samuel Benge wrote:

> Hello everyone. Today I made a scene file which
 > takes an image and applies a 'bloom' effect to
 > the bright parts.

Did you do this by rendering a grayscale map with something like [.5 rgb 
0][.5 rgb 1] blurring the map, and then combining the blur, the original 
map, and the original image? (hope that made sense)

...or, is this a one-step process? For the record, I don't see anything 
procedural/repeatable as unacceptable post-processing.

  -Shay

Post a reply to this message

Samuel Benge wrote:
> Hello everyone. Today I made a scene file which takes an image and 
> applies a 'bloom' effect to the bright parts. The example attached is a 
> bit overdone to show the results. I can control which values in the 
> image are active.
> 
> I think that this technique is probably okay to use in the IRTC, but I 
> wonder if it would be considered a post-processing step or not....
> 
> Happy raytracing~
> 
> -Sam Benge
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
Congratulations, clever technically and pleasing visually.  Is it my 
imagination or is diffused atmosphere in photos becoming so popular 
lately as to practically define current visual style.  Like in ads, TV, 
movies, photo-art, etc., etc.

Post a reply to this message

Jim Charter wrote:

> Congratulations, clever technically and pleasing visually.  Is
> it my imagination or is diffused atmosphere in photos becoming
> so popular lately as to practically define current visual style.
> Like in ads, TV, movies, photo-art, etc., etc.

The Bruckheimer effect.

 -Shay

Post a reply to this message

Jeremy M. Praay wrote:
<snip>

> 
> Incredible work!  :-)
> 


Thanks!

>>I think that this technique is probably okay to use in the IRTC, but I
>>wonder if it would be considered a post-processing step or not....
> 
> Only if it can be done in one step.  It sounds like it's a 2 part process
> (render scene then take image and add bloom effect), which could disqualify
> it, since it's done through the renderer.


Since POV-Ray has so many options (as a programming language), it might 
be possible to link the post-processing file to execute right after a 
render is complete. I'll have to look into that....

 
> Now having said all of that, I'll say that I actually hate IRTC
> post-processing rule discussions...  bleh
 
Me too.


-Sam

Post a reply to this message

Shay wrote:

> Did you do this by rendering a grayscale map with something like [.5 rgb 
> 0][.5 rgb 1] blurring the map, and then combining the blur, the original 
> map, and the original image?

 >

>(hope that made sense)


It does, and it's almost completely correct. There are two planes. One 
has the original image, and it remains unharmed. The second plane is 
above the first one. It contains the blurred highlights using parts from 
the original image. All darker portions are transparent. The upper and 
lower values are controlled in a pigment_map, and allow for a smooth 
transition from transparent color to image-based color. (if that made 
any sense :)

-Sam

Post a reply to this message

Jim Charter wrote:

>>
> Congratulations, clever technically and pleasing visually. 


Thanks

> Is it my 
> imagination or is diffused atmosphere in photos becoming so popular 
> lately as to practically define current visual style.  Like in ads, TV, 
> movies, photo-art, etc., etc.

It adds an extra dimension of realism to an image at low overhead. Cheap 
to render; worth the extra time for some renders. I'll end up using it 
in too many of my renders for a while, eventually learning when *not* to 
use it :)

-Sam

Post a reply to this message

> Hello everyone. Today I made a scene file which takes an image and
> applies a 'bloom' effect to the bright parts. The example attached is a
> bit overdone to show the results. I can control which values in the
> image are active.

This reminds me of my Glare-Include I've written a while ago. What I did was
to render the scene with Black-Textures and Specular-Highlights only, then
calculate the position for the Glare-Image in-scene. Using average-pattern,
I blurred the image a little and thus got me the glaring effect.
Do you use the colored output of your image as input for the blooming
effect?

Regards,
Tim

-- 
"Tim Nikias v2.0"
Homepage: <http://www.nolights.de>

Post a reply to this message

Tim Nikias wrote:

> 
> This reminds me of my Glare-Include I've written a while ago. What I did was
> to render the scene with Black-Textures and Specular-Highlights only, then
> calculate the position for the Glare-Image in-scene. Using average-pattern,
> I blurred the image a little and thus got me the glaring effect.


That would be perfect for ocean scenes and rolex scenes :) I can't 
imagine lining the image up 'in scene' though... sounds very difficult. 
Can you post a link to an example of your technique?


> Do you use the colored output of your image as input for the blooming
> effect?


Yes. I have to first place the #declared image_map inside a 
pigment_pattern block, which makes it grayscale. With that map I am able 
to make the darks parts transparent and the light parts colored with my 
original image_map. I blur the result over a plane with the original 
image_map, untouched. I am thinking of releasing the code, but it has to 
be cleaned up quite a bit.

-Sam

Post a reply to this message

> > This reminds me of my Glare-Include I've written a while ago. What I did
was
> > to render the scene with Black-Textures and Specular-Highlights only,
then
> > calculate the position for the Glare-Image in-scene. Using
average-pattern,
> > I blurred the image a little and thus got me the glaring effect.
>
>
> That would be perfect for ocean scenes and rolex scenes :) I can't
> imagine lining the image up 'in scene' though... sounds very difficult.
> Can you post a link to an example of your technique?
>

It's in my Download-Section:
http://www.nolights.de/download.html#Glare Macros

What I do is just a little arithmetic: take the camera's location and
look_at (along with right, up, and sky) and calculate the viewing frustrum
from that. Place a quad (two triangles) in the line of sight with the
described image_map-function, and there you go! You can have a look at the
source if you like. But linking to my Download-Section should imply that.
;-)


-- 
"Tim Nikias v2.0"
Homepage: <http://www.nolights.de>

Post a reply to this message

Samuel Benge wrote:
> Hello everyone. Today I made a scene file which takes an image and 
> applies a 'bloom' effect to the bright parts. The example attached is a 
> bit overdone to show the results. I can control which values in the 
> image are active.

   It's a very nice effect, and the scene you used for the test is also 
beautiful and very apropiated.

> I think that this technique is probably okay to use in the IRTC, but I 
> wonder if it would be considered a post-processing step or not....

   I think it is clearly a postprocessing filter, but it is allowed as 
it is done by the same renderer. If you do it automatically using a two 
pass technique it's perfectly "legal". Other thing is if the judges will 
detract point for it not being a "true" 3D effect... I will not, as I 
see it as a very creative use of the renderer, wich is what the spirit 
of the competition is all about, IMHO.

   Indeed, congrats: I see your inspiration is coming back!

--
Jaime

Post a reply to this message