[HN Gopher] Blender 3.2
___________________________________________________________________
Blender 3.2
Author : victornomad
Score : 373 points
Date : 2022-06-08 14:56 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.blender.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.blender.org)
| victornomad wrote:
| There is a release party stream that you can follow here
|
| https://youtu.be/0yGoeMfTY8Y
| runevault wrote:
| Seeing this announced made me realize it has been a few months
| since I did anything with blender. I'm not doing much gamedev
| right now (and even when I am I started using all the assets I
| bought cheap in various humble bundles/etc for prototyping) but
| this is giving me the itch to build SOMETHING just to do it.
|
| I am far from a visual artist, but Blender is so satisfying to
| play with.
| felixthehat wrote:
| I was reading this article yesterday: 'The best 3D modelling
| software in 2022'
|
| As a blender studio subscriber & hobbyist, I'm so grateful such
| incredible software has no barrier to entry, especially for
| creatives in developing countries.
|
| You can see this reflected in this great video of the worldwide
| blender community from last years blender conference
| https://youtu.be/uEjmbsiflMU?list=PLa1F2ddGya_8Wzpajwu1EtiS8...
| Autodesk Maya $4590 per year Zbrush $895 Houdini
| $4495 per year Cinema 4D $3495 3ds Max $1700 per year
| Modo $1596 Lightwave $995
|
| https://www.creativebloq.com/features/best-3d-modelling-soft...
| erichocean wrote:
| For Houdini, you listed the price for the version used by major
| VFX studios.
|
| Houdini Indie (with no feature limitations) is only $269 per
| year, and you can also learn Houdini for free too with Houdini
| Apprentice (again: no feature limitations).
|
| Independent VFX artists earn well under the $100K/year revenue
| ceiling for Houdini Indie, so $269/year is their actual "cost."
| ohgodplsno wrote:
| Zbrush and Houdini are still in their own category, untouchable
| though. Blender is getting close to the sheer pleasure that is
| sculpting in Zbrush, but there's still quite a ways to go. And
| Houdini's particle work is unequaled.
| archerx wrote:
| To be fair you can get 3DS Max or Maya for $250 a year with a
| hobby licenses. You can get Houdini for free or super low price
| as well.
| michaelsalim wrote:
| Blender is amazing. The other day, I needed to create a video of
| a rotating image so I looked around for potential software to
| use. Very quick and dirty job.
|
| I didn't want to download anything large like Davinci Resolve. I
| saw OpenShot but was not sure it can do what I needed easily.
| It's not even lightweight.
|
| Then someone mentioned that Blender can do video editing. Can you
| believe that blender is only around 200mb? I downloaded it,
| followed a quick tutorial on YouTube to figure out keyframes and
| how to render. 10 minutes after and I'm done.
|
| It's great to see even more features to the video sequencer in
| this update. Will probably use again for my next video editing
| needs.
| solarkraft wrote:
| I use Blender on macOS because it's the simplest video editor.
| Most importantly it supports webm.
| cowmix wrote:
| I love Blender but NLE functionality still isn't there yet.
| Basic things like keeping audio in sync with video breaks all
| the time. I had to switch to Resolve for my little projects. I
| will continue to evaluate Blender, but for now it still isn't
| ready for primetime.
| bavell wrote:
| Agreed about the NLE. I tried using blender (iirc 2.9) to
| make a family vacation compilation and it was a lot of work
| and not very intuitive. I barely do any video editing though
| so I may just not have had a good workflow. I wasn't able to
| find very good workflows either, I'm assuming because blender
| was still awkward for this use case and others usually reach
| for another tool.
|
| I'm very much looking forward to further improvements and
| judging from the breakneck pace of features and how much love
| the project gets, I'm very optimistic about the future!
| harvie wrote:
| I had some issues with audio syncing to variable FPS video.
| Which is mostly used to save some space and battery when
| taking videos on consumer cameras, but probably something
| that profesional movie makers do not use at all. Still it
| would be nice for home video makers if that thing just worked
| out of the box.
| [deleted]
| reedlaw wrote:
| This problem is present in Premiere Pro too. The
| recommended solution is to convert the variable FPS video
| to constant FPS before using it as a source.
| throw_m239339 wrote:
| To be honest, the video sequencer needs heavy refactoring. Yes,
| it can be used, but the UI isn't the best. Text support is very
| basic, so for titling it's not very useful (text is a general
| issue with blender). Also unfortunately, one cannot use shaders
| directly in the video sequencer to create their own filters for
| instance. Same limitations with the compositor (which isn't GPU
| accelerated so it is really slow).
|
| But hey, it's free.
| victornomad wrote:
| They are remaking the compositor now to be GPU accelerated. I
| saw some videos and looks very impresive!!
| programmarchy wrote:
| The pace of development on Blender is extremely impressive.
| Bravo!
| tarr11 wrote:
| I spent a lot of time during COVID learning Houdini as a
| hobbyist, because I really liked the concept of procedural
| modeling and node based development. However, with the continued
| iterations on Geometry nodes, it feels like a foregone conclusion
| that Blender will replace Houdini for hobbyist procedural
| artists. Cycles is a really nice GPU renderer and I don't have to
| pay a subscription like I do with Redshift.
|
| Houdini still has some strong advantages built over decades such
| as dynamics and KineFX and is the industry leader for FX. But I
| wouldn't be surprised if these tools appear in Blender in a
| future version, though.
| benrjackson wrote:
| IMO geometry nodes are a bit lacking atm. No loops, no
| procedural uv unwrapping, no compact maths expressions, bare
| bones standard node selection in general etc. It feels like
| they've been concentrating on particle system type use cases at
| the expense of things like procedural architecture. However,
| its still a relatively new feature & I'm excited to see where
| it will be in a couple of years time.
|
| The great thing about blender 2.8+ is that it tends to be good
| enough in a lot of different areas even if it isn't best in
| class in any one area. If it can get to that state with
| geometry nodes that would be massive.
| iod wrote:
| AMD HIP support on Linux now works without proprietary drivers on
| RDNA2 cards! My 6700xt is great as all I had to do was just
| install hip-runtime-amd package on Debian from AMD's ROCm repo1.
| I am glad they are putting the work into supporting AMD hardware
| and I no longer have to use opencl and be stuck on older Blender
| versions.
|
| 1 https://repo.radeon.com/rocm/apt/debian ubuntu main
| [deleted]
| stereocodes wrote:
| real caustics!! finally we don't have to make a mask with light
| nodes.
| justinsaccount wrote:
| There really needs to be a "the architecture of open source
| applications" type writeup about Blender.
|
| However it is that it is architectured internally seems to have
| helped it grow over time and not collapse under the weight of 30
| years of hacks and poor decisions.
| alhirzel wrote:
| Completely agree, I wonder if it could be proposed and crowd-
| funded, or perhaps supported by a grant?
|
| Link to AOSA for others' convenience:
| http://aosabook.org/en/index.html
| akersten wrote:
| The lack of corporate pressures to just get features out the
| door and clean them up later (never) I assume is a huge factor.
| I agree, Blender releases new capabilities at such a rapid clip
| that there's certainly a solid base on which they're building
| that we could all learn a few lessons from.
| cokeandpepsi wrote:
| the blender development wiki is already really good plus I
| think there's already a book on working in the blender code
| base 'core blender development' I think
| yobert wrote:
| One of their very early decisions was extremely good in my
| opinion. Each blender file is saved with a complete schema at
| the start which basically describes a bunch of C structs, and
| has a marker for byte order. This means that .blend files can
| be backwards and forwards compatible, and in the most common
| case of the schema matching your memory layout, can have their
| data structures copied directly into memory and then only
| pointer patching is required. It's quite remarkable.
| aliswe wrote:
| Yeah, agree. Very very handy if you are writing a parser!
| UncleEntity wrote:
| > However it is that it is architectured internally...
|
| Countless hacks hanging off one giant MVC.
|
| And having a few core devs with veto powers has helped a bunch
| with it never getting bogged down with bad decisions. I tried
| to get some iffy stuff tacked on but they (mostly Campbell)
| would be "umm, what's this good for?" And don't even think
| about adding a null check to prevent a segfault without getting
| permission first, like, signed in blood...in triplicate.
| dannytatom wrote:
| dreaming for the day blender has more support for 2d animation.
| software like toon boom harmony are way too expensive for
| hobbyist work and there aren't many alternatives for that paper
| cutout type of animation.
| royjacobs wrote:
| It never ceases to amaze me how much improvements Blender is
| getting all the time. I've never used it much, simply because I
| got burned in the past by the (legacy) esoteric UI, but it has
| increasingly become a joy to get started with and just noodle
| around with.
|
| There are other cool open source tools of course. Blender
| could've easily remained another one of those hard to use niche
| applications, but they've definitely managed to transcend that.
| Topgamer7 wrote:
| Blender was one of those things that I got into when I was in
| my early teens. This was around version 2.3X.
|
| It has always had a great community, and made amazing
| development progress.
|
| Version 2.5 was a big ui shift at the time.
|
| These days with 2.8 then 3, they have managed to make some
| amazing progress, in a much faster turn around time.
|
| I commend Ton's direction and the amazing work by the devs :)
| [deleted]
| whywhywhywhy wrote:
| Honestly hats off to the Blender dev team for taking their
| technically impressive but extremely tricky to use software and
| managing to over just a few years turn it into the one piece of
| 3D software everyone is suggesting to beginners and the fact
| it's free isn't even what you mention because the software is
| just great.
|
| Really showing the great user experience on open source
| projects is possible and that the benefits are worth it.
| Milner08 wrote:
| Well damn, I didn't know that it had gotten easier to use but
| I am so glad to here it! I will definitely be giving it
| another go.
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| Oh I had no idea it was improved now. I tried it about 5
| years ago and couldn't make heads or tails of it. I'll try it
| again.
| shahar2k wrote:
| it's improved by quite a bit, I wouldnt call it "intuitive"
| to an existing 3d user, it just goes against so much pre-
| existing muscle memory and assumptions from other apps...
| but so does Z-brush and people love that,
|
| I'm using it more and more these days for little tasks,
| processing meshes, plug ins here and there, it has a
| beautiful and easy to use renderer but I dont work in a
| field where rendering matters.
|
| I dont really want an alternative way to sculpt texture or
| model, I have several already, and really my industry (film
| / previz) is moving to rendering in Unreal or Unity (much
| more unreal) but as a tool Blender is quickly becoming much
| more impressive.
|
| having tought myself zbrush before it was useful
| (2.something?) blender feels like it's just gaining that
| usability now to expose useful features... but there's so
| much more that can be done.
| bsenftner wrote:
| As a career developer 40 years into specializing on 3D
| graphics and animation, Blender's progress and accumulative
| feature set is stunning. I realized about 6 months ago
| Blender had cross a threshold of usability, and in those
| years of being "difficult to learn and use" the Blender
| community quietly built out a feature set that rivals, if
| not exceeds every commercial 3D modeler, animation, node
| based procedural subsystem, compositing, and scientific
| visualization product on the market. Due to Blender's deep
| Python integration, deep learning libraries can be imported
| and integrated to significant mad computer wizardry.
| Blender has come of age, and it is going to eat several
| commercial software publisher's lunch, if they don't wake
| up.
| prox wrote:
| I think I read the focus this year is also live action
| tools / production tools, so lots of things coming that
| fit a professional environment.
| blooalien wrote:
| I've been using it since it first went open source, and
| while it was (and still is to some degree) a _beast_ to
| learn, it was pretty much _always_ the best 3D software
| feature for feature compared against other (quite
| expensive) software I was using / learning at that time.
| Over the intervening years it's improved in _every_
| possible way (except that it 's still extremely complex and
| powerful, but no getting around that). The thing that
| helped me learn it then, and still helps now, is that
| there's a plethora of _excellent_ tutorial videos and
| websites available (as well as these days many great books
| and courses), all of which can be easily found with your
| favorite search engine. For some really great resources,
| check out Blender Guru, CG Cookie, Blender 4 Noobs, and
| other such channels (found easily on YouTube and other
| video hosting websites, and on their own websites as well).
| mkaic wrote:
| I would highly recommend trying it again -- it's improved
| drastically in the past 5 years!
| keewee7 wrote:
| The EU and the Dutch government does not get enough credit for
| sponsoring Blender until very recently when corporate
| sponsorships took off.
|
| In the US the commercial competitors would have sued the
| government for anti-competitive practices if they had sponsored
| Blender.
| Shadonototra wrote:
| firefoxd wrote:
| What the parent meant here is that competitors would have
| sued because Blender is free and open source. Which isn't
| the case for the companies you listed. More like the makers
| of Maya, 3dmax, etc.
| DonHopkins wrote:
| Speaking of monopolies, the makers (or rather buyer) of
| Maya and 3dsmax is now Autodesk.
|
| They both used to be owned by different companies, and
| benefited from the competition.
|
| But now they're owned by the same monopolistic giant
| Autodesk, so they're both entrenched in their captive
| markets, and have stagnated in comparison to how they
| used to evolve when there was competition.
|
| Autodesk really hates Blender, and has always spread a
| lot of FUD about it. For example, Ton has told me that
| Autodesk's sales people falsely told their customers that
| Blender's GPL license means that any content you develop
| in Blender is automatically licensed under the GPL, so
| you can't use it to make copyrighted artwork, which is
| bullshit.
|
| There's such a long history of Autodesk spreading FUD
| about Blender, that when Ton Roosendaal was attacked by a
| ceiling tile during his talk at the 2014 Blender
| Conference, he joked that it was Autodesk! ;)
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJwG-qt-sgk
| hackernewds wrote:
| You could argue all the money printing and zero interest
| rates gave companies easy capital access. People rail on
| them for doing share buybacks, however these companies have
| also went on to capture international markets, and even
| companies. Block (fka Square) acquiring Afterpay (an Aussie
| company) comes to mind.
| Shadonototra wrote:
| It's easy when you can bribe them in peace
|
| https://www.theregister.com/2022/03/25/microsoft_accused_
| of_...
|
| > Block (fka Square) acquiring Afterpay (an Aussie
| company) comes to mind.
|
| A powerful weapon indeed
|
| --
|
| it's unfortunate that people prefer to Flag comments
| rather than downvote when they disagree with someone, it
| feels like i'm being silenced for bringing counter
| arguments to the table
|
| American companies receiving government
| funding/subsidies: https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-
| musk-list-government-su...
|
| Anti-competitive practices: https://old.reddit.com/r/Andr
| oid/comments/71rjyx/why_exynos_...
| pkaye wrote:
| > In the US the commercial competitors would have sued the
| government for anti-competitive practices if they had
| sponsored Blender.
|
| Can you give an example of where this happened?
| aliswe wrote:
| Maybe they are talking about SpeedTax etc?
| thatwasunusual wrote:
| Heard of Google? The latest, and biggest one, is probably
| when 3K+ companies sued the Trump administration over the
| Chinese tariffs.[0]
|
| [0] https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-china-tariffs-
| idUSKCN26H...
| remuskaos wrote:
| This sadly happened in Germany, actually. We have a state
| sponsored weather forecast service, who also released a
| free Android (and possibly IOS) app. They were successfully
| sued by a for-profit commercial weather app (that even uses
| the publicly available data from the state sponsored
| service).
|
| Now the state sponsored app is required by law to not be
| free. Last I checked it costs about two Euros.
| agumonkey wrote:
| Something about the project is very interesting indeed. It
| grows at a regular pace for non trivial ideas. And it seems all
| joyful and light.
| raxxorraxor wrote:
| I have trouble keeping up with the updates lately. To be
| honest, compared to quite a few CAD programs common in
| mechanical engineering, Blender doesn't have to hide here.
| Quite the contrary indeed.
| andybak wrote:
| I know the potential audience is most likely a _lot_ smaller than
| Blender but we 're really struggling to grow the volunteer
| community around Open Brush (the open source fork of Google's
| Tilt Brush).
|
| I was expecting it to grow organically but it's actually gone
| quiet recently - despite continuingly healthly download and usage
| numbers.
|
| If anyone has any suggestions that don't involve me spending all
| my time on community building or PR then I'd love to hear them.
|
| https://openbrush.app/
|
| https://github.com/icosa-gallery/open-brush/
| app4soft wrote:
| > _C# 84.5%_
|
| Sadly, .NET/Mono apps not so good for Linux.
| andybak wrote:
| We ran fine on Linux until recently. We still do under
| Valve's emulation layer but there's no working native OpenXR
| runtime I seem to recall.
|
| C# isn't the problem. Unity takes care of that.
| echelon wrote:
| That's unfortunate, because this is such a killer app for VR-
| based creation.
|
| I expect advanced 3D workflows of the future to look less like
| Blender and Unreal Engine and more like Tilt Brush.
|
| Full degree of motion of both hands is so liberating. Plus it's
| fully immersive. When VR UIs improve around knolling and
| contextual tooling, this will become more obvious to people.
| andybak wrote:
| I agree to a large extent. Although not all interactions have
| been cracked for VR and there are things I'd still prefer to
| do in pancake mode with a keyboard and mouse.
|
| But anything spatial - most definitely. On the whole trying
| to arrange things fluidly in 3D space via a 2D monitor is
| like typing with gloves on.
| cookiecaper wrote:
| I bought a Quest2 last July, right around time that Google was
| killing their Icosa-type-thing.
|
| OpenBrush was imo one of the best apps for it and I wanted to
| start playing around with the code, but had some friction even
| getting a build started and eventually lost interest.
|
| I don't really remember the technical details anymore around
| OpenBrush itself, but just getting the Oculus dev env set up to
| the half-assed extent I did, it's risky, dubious, and feels
| bad. I never know which agreement I might accidentally click
| that'll allow Zuckerberg to Quest2 into my house backwards, or
| whatever.
|
| I installed several SideQuest builds, of course, but after I
| couldn't get a working distributable with built-in Icosa even
| all the way into September, I got annoyed and I haven't started
| or looked at it since.
|
| I guess this is probably a lot less helpful than I thought it
| would be when I started typing. Sorry!
| HellsMaddy wrote:
| Consider detaching your GitHub repo as a fork of tilt-brush.
|
| Whenever I come across a fork on GH, my first assumption is
| that the fork is aiming to be merged back into the main repo in
| the future, and my second assumption is that the maintainers of
| the fork have less of an interest in the project than the
| original project's maintainers. It's a signal of lower quality
| IMO. You should keep mention of the original project in your
| docs, but I personally don't think it's necessary to keep the
| repo as a fork.
|
| You can use the GitHub virtual assistant to request this:
| https://support.github.com/request/fork
|
| I am pretty sure that issues, PRs, stars, and everything
| _should_ be preserved, but don't take my word for it.
| andybak wrote:
| That's a really interesting idea. There would be costs - We'd
| potentially be less discoverable for people forking the
| original. I'd have another place to check for interest
| potential forks (and therefore contributors).
|
| I'll give it some thought.
| danuker wrote:
| I suspect it's because the Metaverse was a flash in the pan.
|
| https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/?project=en.wikipedia.org&star...
|
| AR/VR is a headache. VR goggles are proprietary and locked-
| down, laggy, and make you dizzy. Your eyes try to adjust FoV
| when there is no adjustment needed.
| andybak wrote:
| How is that relevant to anything?
|
| This is an art program for (mainly) individual users and
| predates the metaverse hype by multiple years.
|
| I dislike the metaverse hype as much as you but I love
| content creation tools. There's no need to use any mention of
| VR to rag on that.
|
| I also mentioned our usage numbers are very good so your
| point doesn't even really make sense.
| danuker wrote:
| I modified my comment; indeed the hype was somewhat
| unrelated, but I think the reason it didn't catch on was
| the poor experience of current headsets.
| andybak wrote:
| Lack of users isn't the problem. VR growth is fairly
| healthy and niche applications especially so.
|
| I don't want to get sidetracked into a general "defending
| VR" thing because that got still about 5 years ago.
|
| I was hoping to get people thoughts on how to build a dev
| community around an already popular content creation app.
| commandar wrote:
| > laggy, and make you dizzy.
|
| This is largely a function of both frame rate and IPD.
|
| The latter is one of the reasons why I feel Meta has done an
| absolutely huge disservice to VR adoption by making the
| Oculus series fixed IPD. They claim to be able to software
| compensate, but my experience is that IPD on a headset being
| even just a millimeter or two physically off makes the
| difference between a comfortable VR experience and one that
| leaves me with a headache after the fact.
|
| The fact that they reduced screen refresh rates on the Oculus
| S and the original Quest didn't help at all either.
|
| I've had an Index since shortly after they became available
| and can use it hours at a time without any sort of discomfort
| provided my GPU is able to serve up enough frame rate for a
| particular title. Available GPU power is holding back VR
| currently more than anything, IMO.
| zlsa wrote:
| Antecdotal:
|
| Oculus Go and Rift S were the only fixed IPD headsets they
| produced, and I was able to use the Go comfortably with my
| abnormally wide IPD (69-70mm.) Quest 2 has 3 digital
| settings for IPD, and that also works fine for me at the
| widest setting.
|
| (And both of the other consumer-release Oculus headsets
| (Rift CV1, Quest 1) had analog variable IPD.)
| commandar wrote:
| Didn't realize they'd added it back to the Quest series.
| It was a mistake in the first place on the Rift S, good
| that they reversed course.
|
| I honestly haven't paid super close attention to their
| hardware since the Rift S was such a disappointment and
| the Quest had the lowered screen refresh rates.
| zlsa wrote:
| Rift S felt like an in-between step to partially satisfy
| PCVR users, and it was dropped disappointingly quickly.
| It's obvious that Facebook is moving towards standalone
| headsets now.
|
| Quest 2 is designed to hit a very low price point, and it
| certainly shows. But despite that, it's a very competent
| high-resolution, high-framerate (90, with experimental
| 120Hz support) VR headset; the only major drawbacks are
| low FOV, poor color quality on the display, and lack of
| uncompressed PCVR.
| shahar2k wrote:
| is Multibrush related to your project?
| andybak wrote:
| They are closed source and don't participate in the community
| any more. We're working on our own multiplayer functionality
| that will hopefully be less buggy and more flexible.
| programmarchy wrote:
| You might just be too early right now. VR headsets just aren't
| very popular. Personally, I find the hardware atrocious and am
| waiting for someone like Apple to "do it right". As a late
| adopter of VR, I may not be your target audience, so take what
| I say with a grain of salt.
|
| I was surprised you didn't have any videos of interacting with
| OpenBrush on your home page. Normally, I would have clicked
| away if I stumbled on that page, but since you posted on HN I
| searched it up on YouTube.
|
| Do you and your volunteers use Open Brush regularly? If so,
| toss up some casual live streams on Twitch or other platforms.
| Post on Twitter and Discord, etc. before you go live, then
| upload the recording to YouTube for people to watch later.
|
| Part of what makes Blender so damn accessible is the huge
| number of YouTube tutorials. Virtually every feature of Blender
| has at least one high quality tutorial video, walking people
| through every step.
| [deleted]
| andybak wrote:
| You make some interesting points.
|
| Personally I was always assuming that any potential
| contributor was already fully aware of Tilt Brush. I find it
| hard to imagine that someone would be far enough removed from
| our scene that they would need to be informed about what Tilt
| Brush is about, but engaged enough to want to contribute. Am
| I wrong in this? Tilt Brush has pretty decent mindshare for
| anyone interested in VR content creation.
|
| Another problem is that I just don't really want to spend my
| time making videos. Plenty of other people make videos about
| Open Brush / Tilt Brush. It just doesn't turn into "increased
| engagement from potential volunteers".
|
| I really just want to code new features. Everything else is a
| distraction that I do out of neccesity.
| reactspa wrote:
| Question: do companies / startups hire people who know just
| Blender well (and Gimp/Photoshop), nothing else? (Asking for
| someone else, not myself.)
| stereocodes wrote:
| The thing about 3d modeling and animation is that you should
| actually know a few tools. Most places ask you to have a
| portfolio with 3d projects. They almost never ask for specific
| applications. If you go to artstation.com and look at the tools
| modelers use they typically use a few at a time. Blender is
| insanely good for just modeling. you'll see lots of artist use
| blender just to model, then substance painter for materials
| then import into 3dsmax, cinema4d, or maya for the renderer.
|
| A cool note I just learned recently is that game companies are
| using blender to make hard surface modeling easy. Like EA is
| using blender to make all the levels in the Deadspace remake
| and importing that into Frostbite(their game engine)
| dorkwood wrote:
| I'd say the most important thing is that you're a good 3D
| artist and have a strong portfolio. Smaller studios have a good
| chance of being software-agnostic in the 3D department, unlike
| big AAA ones.
| arboles wrote:
| > Gas simulations now support motion blur
|
| What? Isn't motion blur always done in post anyway? As far as I
| know, motion blur is just a property of the camera, it's caused
| by after images that show up in the picture when things move too
| fast, it has nothing to do with the actual 3d world out there.
| zootboy wrote:
| You need information about the motion in order to simulate
| motion blur. It makes perfect sense for this to be generated by
| the 3D renderer rather than trying to guess at the motion after
| the fact when all you have are 2D frames.
| arboles wrote:
| Does 3D motion blur look better? The standard of realistic
| motion blur is probably real cameras, no? Real cameras don't
| need to guess the motion it's just an afterimage in a
| particular frame while the shutter is open.
| zootboy wrote:
| I don't have any knowledge of this specific implementation,
| but my guess would be that it is a question of
| optimization. If you were to implement something similar to
| what's physically happening in a camera with a long
| exposure, you'd have to do a large number of oversamples
| (e.g. generate 10 sub-frames for every output frame) and
| merge them together. That's a ton of extra rendering. If,
| on the other hand, you can get the 3D renderer to generate
| "smeared geometry" (based on its knowledge of the motion
| speed, direction, and virtual shutter duration) and render
| each output frame once, that will get you faster render
| times.
| d-us-vb wrote:
| Yes, everyone knows where motion blur comes from in a real
| camera, but in a rendering view, there is no real camera. The
| renderer is what applies simulated motion blur. There are some
| simulated optical effects must be accounted for in order to
| render a realistic motion blur, like depth of field. Motion
| blur is quite often added to stylized animation in an equally
| stylized sort of arcing cloud, which requires the renderer to
| also have knowledge of the literal 3d model that's being
| animated.
| arboles wrote:
| > Motion blur is quite often added to stylized animation in
| an equally stylized sort of arcing cloud, which requires the
| renderer to also have knowledge of the literal 3d model
| that's being animated.
|
| You mean smears? That's the animation technique that
| literally deforms geometry, it's a kind of motion blur, and
| it's based on the 3d model of course. But I don't see how a
| gas simulation benefits from smears.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-06-08 23:02 UTC)