On 07/02/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
Haven't checked your shader yet, but I'm considering installing the demo
at work just for that :-)
Realistic DOF is very interresting, and should be built into the system
as an optional method.
I agree.
However, it *MUST* be optional; realistic or quickfake, and not even the
default option. I even think the quickfake one should be made to better
handle reflections and/or when going through foggy materials if
possible. I've had limited success with quickfake DOF reflections (copy+
distance trick), and no success at all within foggy volumes. Don't think
highlights would ever be captured correctly in post, as usually only the
8bit image is available to postprocess.
It might be possible, to some extent, to copy the volume's distance to
a custom channel and then add it to the distance channel in post just
before DOF. I haven't tried this yet.
Reason that it should be optional, is naturally the extreme hit of doing
realistic DOF, with rendertimes multiplying quickly.
Funny enough, but if you use RS post dof with .5 post scaling, my DOF
is just as fast with simple scenes. I haven't tried it with complex
scenes, but I think the post DOF will get faster.
With my computer setup, I'm actually very happy of using postprocessed
DOF (not realsoft's implementation though, I consider that only a
preview).
As for CoC, isn't that pretty much preset depending on the
cameratype/sensorsize you're trying to simulate? My Nikon D80 dslr has a
CoC of 0.02, compact cameras would be around 0.002-0.005, and medium to
large format has larger than dslr CoCs. Wouldn't it be enough just to
set CoC as a constant? It doesn't vary with camaera and lens settings as
such afaik.
CoC might've been the wrong term... what I mean is the 'blur' amount.
This is somehow calculated from aperture size and distance from lens
to film.
Having started abit with photography recently, controlling DOF depending
on subject is of great importance. Having two lenses with 7 curved
blades, I now see the need to increase that to 9 blades. My 18-200VR
lens is one superb lens, but draws horrible bokeh in my view. So now I
need a good portrait lens just to get nice bokeh (how out of focus
objects are "rendered" by the lens) effect :-)
Note that you can control bokeh/blur form with a texture =) it's a bit
slow, but the effect is nice. You can even use colored textures,
although the total 'contribution' is normalized to 1,1,1.
DOF (fake or realistic looking) is one of CGI's biggest faults, but I
didn't realize it until I started shooting myself. In real life,
*getting* all in focus can be a bitch, in CGI it's the default setup and
cost less rendertime wise. I see little use of DOF in the competision
images.
I recently did some tests trying to create a quickefake version of a
Tilt lens. Easily done in RS3D. Instead of the usual method of making a
separate channel measure distance from camera to subject, I mapped it
using a default parallel map in some odd angle instead of perpendicular
to the camera (controlling the focus plane). Results were pretty odd :-)
Looking into a field of flowers, I could have the top of all flowers
into focus, gradually falling out of focus toward the ground.
Sounds like fun, I should try that =)
Just some real world examples of this:
http://www.nikonians.org/html/resources/nikon_articles/nikkor/special_pu
rpose/85_PC/falguera.html
http://www.naturfotograf.com/28pc.html
And the most obvious effect of them all :-)
http://users.gsinet.net/pjwhite/35tstest3f8full.jpg
Have you tried your shader doing tilt lens work?
I'm not quite sure how this should be implemented... would it suffice
if I added a 'blur' channel to the plane ? This way you could change
the blur amount locally.
Just my 2-300 cents ;-)
Regards
Karl
