I like it. -- - pixel:muncher
> On May 27, 2015, at 11:27 PM, Michael Garrett <[email protected]> wrote: > > Sorry for the late reply. Did you find a solution? I misunderstood what you > were describing. The expression method I mentioned doesn't fix that scenario, > what it does is delete deep samples wherever a given channel has zero > samples. > > I agree, having multiple deep samples in this way is wasteful when you're > just dealing with discrete opaque objects. I've run into this issue big-time > with Mantra a while back but it's the same thing you describe in Nuke: lots > of sample bloat in non-overlapping opaque deep images (non-volumetric) where > the only transparency was from AA and motion blur, so it seems there should > be the option to have only one deep sample where the surface is opaque and > facing camera, since you don't want to comp it into a volume or have it > intersect with another object. Things become more complicated with glancing > angles but with broad surfaces facing camera, some compression could be > applied. > > Basically I'm describing a kind of fresnel/facing ratio-based deep sample > compression. It seems like it would need to be something the render engine > figures out, rather than a post process. I did kind of get it working as a > comp-based solution, but it led to a little bit of aliasing due to the number > of dropped samples. > > Cheers, > Michael > >> On 2 May 2015 at 12:22, Hugo Léveillé <[email protected]> wrote: >> If you just put a simple sphere with antialiasing to high and that you use >> the deep sample, you'll see some random pixel sample with multiple samples >> right in the middle of the sphere. And if you use multisamples with a moving >> camera, then all samples are just crazy. >> >> Do you have a exemple of that deep expression? >> 'Thanks >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >>> On Apr 23, 2015, at 8:44 PM, Michael Garrett <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Ooh I didn't know about those nodes...thanks for pointing them out. >>> >>>> On 22 April 2015 at 23:37, Marten Blumen <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Do you have an example where 100% opaque front pixels don't drop samples? >>>> Just ran a quick test and it appeared to do that automatically in Nuke >>>> 9.05 when using DeepToPoints post Scanline. >>>> >>>> There are hidden DeepDeOverlap, DeepOmit & Deep Clip Z nodes available >>>> after updating that may try to do something you're after. >>>> >>>>> On 22 April 2015 at 13:29, Michael Garrett <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> I don't have Nuke open, but is there not a "drop zero opacity samples" >>>>> checkbox on the ScanlineRender deep tab? >>>>> >>>>> If not, the workaround that has worked for me is to run an expression >>>>> with DeepExpression that pushes the location of any deep samples with >>>>> zero alpha behind the camera frustum, then use a DeepCrop to get rid of >>>>> them. Hope that helps. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Michael >>>>> >>>>>> On 21 April 2015 at 21:18, Hugo Léveillé <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> Hi >>>>>> >>>>>> Is there a way to drop deep samples in renders made in nuke's scanline >>>>>> when front pixel is 100% opaque? Cause as soon as you add some motion >>>>>> blur in your scanline, deep samples get crazy and make a very huge file. >>>>>> >>>>>> thanks >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Nuke-users mailing list >>>>>> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >>>>>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Nuke-users mailing list >>>>> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >>>>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Nuke-users mailing list >>>> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >>>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Nuke-users mailing list >>> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Nuke-users mailing list >> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users > > _______________________________________________ > Nuke-users mailing list > [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ > http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
_______________________________________________ Nuke-users mailing list [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
