Travelling displacement + moblur?

[Austin]

I've animated the U and V offset of a displacement map, but I can't seem to get it to motion blur. This kindof makes sense, but I'm still in denial

Does anyone know of a way to "bake" the displacement onto the model? I'm using the VRay displacement modifier. I don't think the max displacement modifier would work as well, but I'm going to try it out anyway.

[Morbid Angel]

unfortinantly this is so, as there is no way to 3d trace the map translation over the surface because its not a 3d object and thus doesnt have vertex position. Displacement is generated based on that after wards. The only way to do this is to render camera multipass.

[cpnichols]

I remember a similar issue that the FX team was having on a movie I was working on with a giant wave hitting a city. This is not a Vray issue but a general rendering issue. Since the geometry is created frame to frame, it does not know what polygon traveled to what polygon. I think the solution was to use a sophisticated optical flow system in post.

[Austin]

Bingo, just thought of a workaround. You increase the FPS of your file, render a sequence, and take into a post program and squeeze it back down to the right length. Any post program will include all the frames in the interpolation and will simulate a moblur effect. Unfortunately, in this case we don't have the time budget for that :/

Thanks for the help guys

[jacksc02]

good solution austin!
Dont you hate not having an unlimited budget!!

[Dynedain]

when working in combustion there is a setting in the footage controls to blur between frames, it might be for only quicktime files, but it could work

[Austin]

I'm not sure about Combustion, but I know that Fusion and Premiere will do this (happy accidental discovery once).

[Giovanni]

Austin,
you mean, you scale the clip back to original speed, and activate something like AE frame blending?
So, instead of creating interpolated frames based on existing ones, it would take out frames and blend them with the remaining ones, thus "blurring" (double edges?) the image?

Is that it?

thanks

gio

[Austin]

Exactly.

[peterC]

Nice solution.
thanx for the tip.
Peter