PDA

View Full Version : TRUE 3D Motion Blur



cavalos
04-24-2003, 08:29 AM
Does LW have it or is faked?

Lightwolf
04-24-2003, 08:43 AM
Standard LW motionblur is "real" (multisampling in time).
There is also a 2D vector blur available (image filters).

Mylenium
04-24-2003, 11:31 AM
Yes, possibly LW is one of those progs that used true multi temporal sampling while others still tried to fake the effect. However, I feel that this feature still needs some work. With all the updates it has become somewhat buggy and produces bad results mor often than necessary (wrong blur vectors, banding even at extreme settings).

Mylenium

Elmar Moelzer
04-24-2003, 11:48 AM
Hmm I have never had wrong blur- vectors, despite using Vector- blur without antialiasing. Do you have a sample- scene you can give me to test that out? Dithered motionblur really helps getting rid of the banding with very fast motions
CU
Elmar

DaveW
04-24-2003, 01:08 PM
Just mix the LW motion blur and vector blur together. You get the best of both worlds, true 3d motion blur but no stepped blurs. Cuts down rendertimes a lot since you don't need to crank up the AA.

Same thing with DOF + DOF blur.

cavalos
04-24-2003, 03:47 PM
Is amazing that Lw have that feature and High end renderers like Final render (Stage-0) and Brazil (1.0) don't.
I would like to see some kind of comparision between theese apps. :)

Best
Christian

cavalos
04-24-2003, 04:42 PM
Cim: What do you mean with, stop "real". I don't get it...In the other hand I agree with you when you say NT have to take some notes on how other renderers are evolving.

Best
Christian

DaveW
04-24-2003, 06:15 PM
NewTek doesn't need to stop doing things the real way, they just need to have the option for the other methods as well. In some cases it's faster to use LW motionblur + vectorblur in blur mode than it is to just use vectorblur in vector mode, so it's nice to have options. They've just need to extend what they've done with DOF and motionblur to other things like radiosity, area/linear lights, ect.

cavalos
04-24-2003, 07:30 PM
Thatīs Right, to have options is great and key to get the job done in many cases. Thatīs why many LW users like me asks features like absorption, dispersion, Other GI algortims etc.

Best
Christian

harhar
04-24-2003, 09:50 PM
what makes you think Brazil doesn't have true 3d motion blur?

Mental ray's raytraced motion blur doesn't ablaze, it's slow like all the others. Only renderman's motion blur is fast.

Mylenium
04-25-2003, 01:22 AM
Well, I think what CIM is referring to is LW's super scientific approach. LW always tries to do too many things too correctly based upon mathematically/ physically exact formulas and thus wastes a lot of computing power. Also many things do not work adaptively like e.g. volumetric slices/ voxels based upon distance. This is why other renderers are much faster in certain areas - they work largely adaptively and try to take into account perceptional phenomena. Who actually cares if MBlur is 2D or real 3D as long as everything looks ok and the alpah is intact?

Mylenium

faulknermano
04-25-2003, 07:08 AM
Originally posted by Mylenium
This is why other renderers are much faster in certain areas - they work largely adaptively and try to take into account perceptional phenomena. Who actually cares if MBlur is 2D or real 3D as long as everything looks ok and the alpah is intact?

Mylenium

well, for the sake of argument, one could say that it covers all the possible bases. rather than setting a program to do what one expects, you can do it 'by-the-book' to make sure it is capable of carrying out functions you would not necessarily forsee when you were writing it.

just a thought.

cavalos
04-25-2003, 10:14 AM
I donīt care if 2D and 3D looks identic, for me thatīs fine BUT that doesnīt mean I want to waste the "REAL" simulations and direct computations because, as I say is good to have options, is good to know I can depend on (again) "REAL" 3D algoritms from time to time. In any case is funny to hear someone talking about New Tekīs cientific and too "exact" aproach while I can not render a simple gemstone without having IOR artifacts!

Faster routines and algortihms, more options...thatīs what we really needs.

Best
Christian

cavalos
04-28-2003, 01:22 PM
Harhar wrote: "what makes you think Brazil doesn't have true 3d motion blur?"

So far announced features, which are planned to be placed in Brazil v2.0, are:

- TRUE 3D Motion Blur
- Displacement mapping
- Massive Instancing
- Photometric light support
- Improved shadows

Best
Christian

harhar
04-28-2003, 04:14 PM
Brazil 1.0 doesn't support displament map?

cgolchert
04-28-2003, 09:32 PM
Originally posted by Mylenium
e.g. volumetric slices/ voxels based upon distance.

If you used LW5.5 and then moved to LW6 you may have noticed the ability to switch between a specific number of slices and a setting.

Akryls
06-09-2005, 10:29 AM
I don't know about brazil, but mental ray's 3d motion blur is far from the real thing in a few cases : spinning lights don't work (you get shadow motion blur if you move the object, but not when you move the light.. and combined fast light and object move give shadows artifacts), and the blur is linear on deformed objects (on a character arm rotation for example, you get linear blur...).
Lightwave's motion blur is slow, but when combined with spinning tricks for everything (lights, fog, reflection/refraction blur.. the list is long), you get very decent rendering times with real 3D motion blur. I always work with motion blur and without area lights :)

spud_q
06-19-2005, 04:34 AM
Is amazing that Lw have that feature and High end renderers like Final render (Stage-0) and Brazil (1.0) don't.
I would like to see some kind of comparision between theese apps. :)

Best
Christian



A render comparison article I have been following for over a year now. Very enlightening http://www.zaon.com/company/articles/3d_rendering.php

yazan
06-23-2005, 10:12 AM
did i miss something? I don't think we're talking about the same true motion blur. Lightwave to my knowledge does not. Please point me to it! Check out what worley has to say about it at the end of the page.
http://www.worley.com/fprime.html
And even worley's isn't true motion blur. True 3D motion blur involves also specualr motion blur without losing the intensity (this is over the top, think moving lights at night). Vector blur is also very limited, and produces more bad artifacts than good. I do agree that an average between the two produces ok results, but calling them true is something I wouldn't do at this point.
Here's another read for final render
http://www.finalrender.com/products/feature.php?UD=10-7888-35-788&PID=36&FID=301
post your motion blur settings so we can try them out.
I've tried a bunch of settings, as far as I know, lightwave blends the passes together to achieve its look. And the vector blur is for linear movements only. If anyone has any other info, please feel free to jump in and correct me.
Yazan