Re: [Nuke-users] GPU FFT?

2017-03-21 Thread Hugo Léveillé 
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  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  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  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  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  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 :
> 
> 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 
> 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
>>> ___
>>>

Re: [Nuke-users] GPU FFT?

2017-03-20 Thread Ron Ganbar 
Thanks Peter!



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 6:23 PM, Peter McAuley  wrote:

> https://betterexplained.com/articles/an-interactive-guide-
> to-the-fourier-transform/
>
> On 20 March 2017 at 14:17, Ron Ganbar  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 <+44%207968%20007309> [UK]
>>   +972 (0)54 255 9765 <+972%2054-255-9765> [Israel]
>> url: http://ronganbar.wordpress.com/
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Magno Borgo  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 
>>> 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  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 
> 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  >:
>
>>
>> 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 
>> 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/nuk
>>> e-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
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [Nuke-users] GPU FFT?

2017-03-20 Thread Peter McAuley 
https://betterexplained.com/articles/an-interactive-guide-to-the-fourier-transform/

On 20 March 2017 at 14:17, Ron Ganbar  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 <+44%207968%20007309> [UK]
>   +972 (0)54 255 9765 <+972%2054-255-9765> [Israel]
> url: http://ronganbar.wordpress.com/
>
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Magno Borgo  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 
>> 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  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 
 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 :

>
> 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 
> 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
>>>

Re: [Nuke-users] GPU FFT?

2017-03-20 Thread Ron Ganbar 
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  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 
> 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  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 
>>> 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 :
>>>

 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 
 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/
>

Re: [Nuke-users] GPU FFT?

2017-03-20 Thread Magno Borgo 
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   
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  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   
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 :


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 
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

Re: [Nuke-users] GPU FFT?

2017-03-20 Thread jon parker 
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  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  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 :
>>
>> 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 
>> 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

Re: [Nuke-users] GPU FFT?

2017-03-20 Thread Magno Borgo 
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  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 :
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   
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

Re: [Nuke-users] GPU FFT?

2017-03-20 Thread Mads Lund 
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 :

> 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 
> 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
___
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

Re: [Nuke-users] GPU FFT?

2017-03-19 Thread Deke Kincaid 
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  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

Re: [Nuke-users] GPU FFT?

2017-03-19 Thread Michael Habenicht 

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

Re: [Nuke-users] GPU FFT?

2017-03-19 Thread Ben Dickson 
Not quite FFT but there is a similar DCT implemented as a blinkscript on 
Nukepedia,

http://www.nukepedia.com/blink/other/dct-discrete-cosine-transform

There is also just the Convolve node (buggy and a bit slow at least on 
CPU), or you can (mis)use the ZDefocus node in "math: direct" to do 
convolution


On 20/03/17 10:50, jon parker wrote:

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



--
ben dickson
2D TD | ben.dick...@rsp.com.au
rising sun pictures | www.rsp.com.au
___
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