|
|
DOF in tS idea
About Truespace Archives
These pages are a copy of the official truespace forums prior to their removal somewhere around 2011.
They are retained here for archive purposes only.
DOF in tS idea // Roundtable
Post by nowherebrain // May 2, 2007, 3:05pm
|
nowherebrain
Total Posts: 1062
|
tS can do nearly true DOF out of the box....
1)give your camera a target(look at something).
2) give the camera a star pattern animation based on it's x and z coords..
..(make certain it is in 1 frame increments from location to location)
3)render as an animation with the number of camera frames used as the length
***you must apply motion blur!!!
4)play with the settings until you find your comfort zone..
5)composite the individual frames to one image(requires external image editor with layer support...GIMP is free)
*NOTE* this is good for stills animations just aren't efficient..you really need to play with anim lengths in the scene, then speed up the end result in an external editor. With this method you can use lightworks for it. |
Post by Burnart // May 2, 2007, 6:53pm
|
Burnart
Total Posts: 839
|
DOF? I must be having a stupid moment - DOF to me means "Depth Of Field" but that doesn't seem to be what you are talking about.:confused: |
Post by prodigy // May 2, 2007, 7:55pm
|
prodigy
Total Posts: 3029
|
yup he talk about Deep of Field.. but i lost after the 2nd step..:p |
Post by Morgan // May 2, 2007, 9:53pm
|
Morgan
Total Posts: 138
|
If I read it right, essentially he's "jittering" the camera really quickly. Those items which are directly in front of the camera won't appear to move much in different frames; those items further away will move more, and will thus have a greater motion blur, which when blended all into one image would result in a simulated depth of field effect.
Do I have it right, Nowherebrain? |
Post by TheWickedWitchOfTheWeb // May 3, 2007, 12:44am
|
TheWickedWitchOfTheWeb
Total Posts: 858
|
Surely it'd be quicker and easier to just render with a depth map and then add the DOF in post? Even pre 7 or iPak owners can do that using the ZDepth tsx. Infinite control and tweakability that way. |
Post by nowherebrain // May 3, 2007, 12:59am
|
nowherebrain
Total Posts: 1062
|
I tried the depth map, long ago...I just used another render pass using a fog setting. I then convert the fog area to mask and blur(Guass)..this is much faster, but you do not get near blur, only far. you can use alternate patterns(star, cicle, spiral) I have found that a 8 pointed star pattern covers my bases better, e.g. blur up, blur dwn, left, right, and the diagonal shifts. I play with this from time to time and it seems to work pretty well for me. I cannot show the renders I had done, as they were for the military, but maybe I should do a quick and dirty for people to see the steps???? of course this will be useless for most of us(with Vray 1.0). Some of the other users may want to try it though.
Remember the tighter the pattern the better results, too large a spread and the focus object becomes too blurred, and we don't want that blurry at all.
@wwotw: I did not even know there was a plugin for a depth pass...cool.
and yes this is basically a camera "jitter". |
Post by parva // May 3, 2007, 1:30am
|
parva
Total Posts: 822
|
Mmh, yes nowherebrain is right. I do like postprocess dof as well but it can't be done in any pictures espacially those with different focus (far,near) and objects with masks/transparency can become a tricky task done manually.
The DoF plugin from Richard Rosenman is as far as I know still the best tool to do DoF but also here it can become difficult to use a depth map or you need more as one pass.
The thing with the "jitter" is clever either I haven't seen any good results. Would like to see some examples :) |
Post by TheWickedWitchOfTheWeb // May 3, 2007, 1:31am
|
TheWickedWitchOfTheWeb
Total Posts: 858
|
You can get near and far blur with post process using a depth map. It's built into tS7 and ts 4.3 - 6.6 users can also have it with the free ZRender plugin: http://ckgamefactory.hp.infoseek.co.jp/tsxe/zrender.html |
Post by W!ZARD // May 3, 2007, 11:25am
|
W!ZARD
Total Posts: 2603
|
There's more than one way to skin a cat as they say. While it's only practical for stills and then only for certain compositional scenarios it's possible to build a scene that comprises visually of three (or two) different zones - foreground (if required), subject and background.
Put each zone on a seperate layer.
Hide all but the background and render this - blur the result using gaussian blur in The GIMP or PSP or whatever. Use the result as background shader in original tS scene.
Hide objects in background zone layer - unhide subject and render against gaussian blurred background - works well with head and shoulder shots. See this for an example (http://www.caligari.com/Gallery/ImagesGallery/2005/Nov/winner.asp?img=1963).
To get a blurred forground requires masks and so forth in your favourite 2d editor but it's not difficult really |
Post by Burnart // May 3, 2007, 12:54pm
|
Burnart
Total Posts: 839
|
Still feeling stupid - a couple of pics would help. |
Post by nowherebrain // May 3, 2007, 2:01pm
|
nowherebrain
Total Posts: 1062
|
@brunheart: Soon I will get one out, I just started a new job(wood working) and am pretty tired when I return home.
@WWoTW: thanks for the link, I am going to check it out. |
Post by nowherebrain // May 6, 2007, 8:41am
|
nowherebrain
Total Posts: 1062
|
I just created a video tutorial on the subject. Hopefully you will see something soon. In the mean time here is an example of what is possible...each render took about 2.5 minutes and they are pretty simple..of course you could tweak to get better settings. |
Post by Burnart // May 6, 2007, 1:07pm
|
Burnart
Total Posts: 839
|
Nice one nowherebrain - DoF is really punchy - the difference between images is it caused by position of look-at object? spread of star pattern? Also the assembly in a paint program is it just standard transparency? - what % of each image is added? (Being essentially lazy I'm trying to pick the brains of someone who has done it so I don't need to spend lots of time messing about before I get it to work right! :p ) |
Post by nowherebrain // May 6, 2007, 3:57pm
|
nowherebrain
Total Posts: 1062
|
Nice one nowherebrain - DoF is really punchy - the difference between images is it caused by position of look-at object?
Yes.
spread of star pattern? Also the assembly in a paint program is it just standard transparency? - what % of each image is added? (Being essentially lazy I'm trying to pick the brains of someone who has done it so I don't need to spend lots of time messing about before I get it to work right! :p )
The spread of the pattern is the amount of focus...
large spread = aggressive effect
small spread = subtle effect
My new method ditches a compositor, basically, it is composited by the renderer. You probably wont need to spend much time getting it right...IT DOES TAKE longer to render though... |
|
