[Bf-committers] Better approaches to Defocus?

Matt Ebb matt at mke3.net
Wed Jun 29 01:26:39 CEST 2011


On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:33 AM, François T. <francoistarlier at gmail.com>wrote:

> I guess I'm just one of those who like to keep things seperated and when
> I'm
> looking for a vblur who finds a vblur node and not a defocus node which as
> a
> vblur capability. Just a design thing. but again just my opinion so not a
> big issue :D
>

I agree philosophically that separate tasks should be in separate nodes, but
in a practical sense for this particular issue it's not that simple. Having
these two combined in one operation could potentially help things a lot.

It's always a problem when trying to both defocus and blur animated footage
- sometimes you can improve things a bit by experimenting with which one
should come first for any given situation, but in the end there are *always*
artifacts that are impossible to work around. Either way, with the two
separated, you're trying to defocus or motion blur something based on a z
buffer or motion vector channels that are no longer accurate. Trying hacks
like blurring z buffers or motion vectors just bring in problems of their
own.

This is a major problem when trying to render production animation with
blender with composited motion/dof blur - it's always painful to know that
there are inevitably going to be artifacts no matter what, and hoping that
people just don't notice is not really acceptable. I used to always try to
do my best to work around/patch up these problems but it always made me feel
very uncomfortable knowing that I was delivering frames like this...

Matt


More information about the Bf-committers mailing list