I have made one small video about it in my last training at fxphd. To remove a 
bad signal baked in the image. Not using it everyday, but might works like 
magic in some cases

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 20, 2017, at 2:17 PM, Ron Ganbar <ron...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> He's a question:
> Can somebody properly explain FFT?
> (I'm feeling so inadequate right now. Am I the only one left who doesn't know 
> what this magical acronym is?)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ron Ganbar
> email: ron...@gmail.com
> tel: +44 (0)7968 007 309 [UK]
>       +972 (0)54 255 9765 [Israel]
> url: http://ronganbar.wordpress.com/
> 
>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Magno Borgo <li...@borgo.tv> wrote:
>> A non-nuke alternative would be to pre-render the FFT using a python package 
>> like scipy or similar, which already have fast FFT implementations, then 
>> load/read it inside NUKE. That might help on some pipelines, though the 
>> inverse edited FFT would still be needed to handled inside Nuke to be 
>> practical.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 11:09:30 -0400, jon parker <parker....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Thanks for the responses! I'm not a full-time comper so am unaware of
>>> some of the tricks out there, like using ZDefocus.  And I should have
>>> added that large kernels / images are involved so the standard
>>> convolve node falls behind at the resolution we are working with.
>>> 
>>> Magno, I wasn't aware of your blinkscript.  If I have some time I'll
>>> peek at the code.
>>> 
>>> Someone should put together a commercial implementation for Nuke some
>>> day, sounds like there is demand out there for it.
>>> 
>>> -Jon
>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 7:18 AM, Magno Borgo <li...@borgo.tv> wrote:
>>>> I coded a naive Blinkscript DCT (and inverse) implementation a while back,
>>>> you can check the code and use as a start for a better implementation.
>>>> 
>>>> http://www.nukepedia.com/blink/other/dct-discrete-cosine-transform
>>>> 
>>>> Magno.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 03:39:40 -0400, Mads Lund <madshl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> we did some CPU vs FFT tests aswell, but I can't remember the exact kernel
>>>> size where FFT started to be more efficient, but it was rather low. On the
>>>> flip side Convolve on the GPU seem to have some memory problems and (at
>>>> least for us) cause some random out of memory issues, even on beefy cards.
>>>> 
>>>> We found that using gaming techniques: up-scaling low frequency areas (then
>>>> convolving) and only full convolving of high frequency areas to be to be
>>>> quite efficient for the vast majority of our renders where the plate is
>>>> gigantic or a large kernel size is needed.
>>>> The result is perceptually indistinguishable.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> man. 20. mar. 2017 kl. 06.14 skrev Deke Kincaid <dekekinc...@gmail.com>:
>>>>> 
>>>>> The convolve node was fixed up quite a while a go(4-5 years ago, it is
>>>>> what the zdefocus is based on).  In our tests though we still find the FFT
>>>>> nodes faster on the farm vs convolve in CPU mode.  If you have a gpu farm
>>>>> then convolve is faster.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 6:23 PM Michael Habenicht <m...@tinitron.de>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The latest version of the convolve node has gpu support.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Am 20.03.2017 um 01:20 schrieb jon parker:
>>>>>> > Greetings Nuke users,
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I'm just wondering if there are any faster, more robust FFT tools
>>>>>> > available for Nuke besides the (hidden) built-in nodes?
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > The built-ins do the job, but they are pretty slow and definitely
>>>>>> > prone to crashing fairly often.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Or, alternatively, something that does fast image convolution, some
>>>>>> > other way, under the hood could work too.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Cheers,
>>>>>> > Jon
>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>> > Nuke-users mailing list
>>>>>> > Nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk, http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>>>>>> > http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Nuke-users mailing list
>>>>>> Nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk, http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>>>>>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Nuke-users mailing list
>>>>> Nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk, http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>>>>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Best regards. Mads Hagbarth Lund
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Nuke-users mailing list
>>>> Nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk, http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>>>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Nuke-users mailing list
>>> Nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk, http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nuke-users mailing list
>> Nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk, http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Nuke-users mailing list
> Nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk, http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
_______________________________________________
Nuke-users mailing list
Nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk, http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users

Reply via email to