I think that a motion blur could make things look great. The only thing is that I couldn't really imagine how it would be done but here are my ideas.
A motion blur is a combination of two frames. So, if one frame was:
0
and the next frame was
0
then the result would be a blur between the two zeros
0-0
Sorry for the crappy dash, but that's my motion blur.
So, would this be somthing you would put into a superscope that you wish to motion blur by changing the colors based on the behaviour of the scope? Or would it be possible in a Dynamic Movement? I'm guessing that it would requre somthing like AVS takes like a variable of an image and somehow blurs it with the frame after the taken image. Does anyone have ideas?
What about motion blur?
16 posts
To get good motion blur by blending frames you need extremely high framerates, otherwise you'll only get ghosting.
How could you blend frames like that though? There's got to be a simple way to do it, or at least fake it.
This sounds a lot like something I've done a few times, by creating an empty Effect List with the input mode set to "50/50" and the output mode set to "Replace". This creates a blending effect much like what you seem to be describing.
Of course, you can do the same thing with the input mode set to "Adjustable"; it'll probably be slightly slower, but you can control the strength of the effect.
Of course, you can do the same thing with the input mode set to "Adjustable"; it'll probably be slightly slower, but you can control the strength of the effect.
Blur made something looks great.. 👍
I've done it a couple of times, with multiple dynamic movements. Though they were radial zoom blurs, but the same method could be adjusted for motion blur.
It's a really slow method though.
Examples from two of my packs in the zip.
It's a really slow method though.
Examples from two of my packs in the zip.
Oooh, Faster than light! I still love that preset, it's so simple but the result is fantastic. 😁👍
Originally posted by StevenRoyPERFECT!! Thanks SO much. This is just the effect I was going for! You're awsome.
This sounds a lot like something I've done a few times, by creating an empty Effect List with the input mode set to "50/50" and the output mode set to "Replace". This creates a blending effect much like what you seem to be describing.
Of course, you can do the same thing with the input mode set to "Adjustable"; it'll probably be slightly slower, but you can control the strength of the effect.
Hmm, then i have a completly different concept of what "motion blur" is 😱
I was thinking the motion blur effect of image manipulators, ie. photoshop. Couldn't even imagine you wanted something as simple as a 50/replace effect list 😛
I was thinking the motion blur effect of image manipulators, ie. photoshop. Couldn't even imagine you wanted something as simple as a 50/replace effect list 😛
Yeah, there's a "directional" motion blur (like Photoshop has), and then there's a "temporal" motion blur. It's easy to confuse the two, especially since "motion blur" usually refers to the former.
In fact, I'm not sure "blur" is even accurate in this case; "blend" might be a better word. "Motion blend".
In fact, I'm not sure "blur" is even accurate in this case; "blend" might be a better word. "Motion blend".
Tell that to the developers.
Damn them and their false terms!
Damn them and their false terms!
LOL, Tugg: the inconsistent nomenclature is spread throughout DSP; its a mess trying to communicate it....
How about 'physically correct' motion blur? Its prolly the easiest since they give you a fadeout to start with... which is mostly what motion blur is 🙂
Now using the effect list with the 50/50 blend trick just does a special type of fadeout
new=.5*old
i.e. it halfs brightness each frame.
A cheaper and fps independent way to do this is with a color modifier:
init:
lasttime=gettime(0);
frame:
dt=gettime(lasttime);lasttime=gettime(0);
opt = pow(.5,30*dt);
level:
red=red*opt;green=green*opt;blue=blue*opt;
This gives a reasonably accurate approximation to the fadeout acheived by halving the color 30 times a second (like the effect list trick would work running at 30fps).
Now using the effect list with the 50/50 blend trick just does a special type of fadeout
new=.5*old
i.e. it halfs brightness each frame.
A cheaper and fps independent way to do this is with a color modifier:
init:
lasttime=gettime(0);
frame:
dt=gettime(lasttime);lasttime=gettime(0);
opt = pow(.5,30*dt);
level:
red=red*opt;green=green*opt;blue=blue*opt;
This gives a reasonably accurate approximation to the fadeout acheived by halving the color 30 times a second (like the effect list trick would work running at 30fps).
But real motion blur doesn't fade out, you'd have to average framerate/simulated_shutter_speed frames.
Originally posted by gaekwad2
But real motion blur doesn't fade out, you'd have to average framerate/simulated_shutter_speed frames.
On a camera I agree that it is related to exposure time... but I don't think the eyes work in quite the same way. Afaik they recieve a continuous stream of data (photon interactions with eye stuff), and they continually update based on it, blending with the old data, much how a fadeout with no clear every frame works...
Yeah, I was thinking of simulating a camera, not the eye.