non-linear DOF, possible?

[vlado]

Yeah, but that would look so weird...

Best regards,
Vlado

[super gnu]

ha.. i made a sarcastic comment.. vlado has already figured out the maths and visualised the end result. does bendy raytracing actually exist as a concept?

i guess putting the whole scene inside a medium with a volumetric gradient on the IOR would do something like that. and yes.. ii imagine it could go a bit.. funhouse.

[vlado]

ha.. i made a sarcastic comment.. vlado has already figured out the maths and visualised the end result. does bendy raytracing actually exist as a concept?

Yes, Phoenix FD does that for the heat haze effect.

Best regards,
Vlado

[super gnu]

ahh cool

[Slazzo]

I don't think this will be hard to implement, if V-Ray uses circle of confusion for the DOF effect, must be something easy like testing the hit point distance within the planes and recalculating the radius 'of confusion' for every ray, this way we can have even more than one focal distance which should be fun.

On second thought, nah it's not gonna work.

[zoranm]

I agree with Neil proposal. That is something that had been on my wish list for a while now.Would it be possible to actually do it as an effect, similar to what Photoshop does:1. Vray does normal, raytraced render without DOF2.Vray uses z-depth channel to blur pixels, based on the distance from the camera(as in Neil's proposal)3.Vray, hopefully, does it better than PSJust an idea.Zoran

[Deflaminis]

I agree, I think using zdepth as a post effect would be cool and hopefully easier to implement. (And maybe could use normals and velocity elements for better edge antialiasing/contrast? Even if it was just a simple previewed tone mapper for the 4 points as listed by soulburn3d that output a standard looking zdepth pass that plugs into post packages easily and without needing many further adjustments.

I'd actually pay a good couple hundred bucks or so for a good 32bit post-fx plugin for vray frame buffer that was capable of doing realistic faked god rays, dof tricks such as in this thread, distance fog (with similar tone mappers as the DOF), upgraded filter generator and integration for bloom/glare controls, etc.

[jstrob]

I agree with neail, that would be amazing. DOF in post often creates artifacts and rarely looks as good as dof rendered in 3d (or at least I don't know how).

[bigbossfr]

I agree with neail, that would be amazing. DOF in post often creates artifacts and rarely looks as good as dof rendered in 3d (or at least I don't know how).

Render your image in deep pixel and use Bokeh. You will have full control and very great DOF.

[jstrob]

I use Frischluft lenscare in after effect. What do you mean exactly? Which soft?

[joconnell]

So the big problem with zdepth and flaws in post dof is that a normal image can only save pixel information for each of the objects that the camera sees, it can't save anything for objects that are in behind those objects so when you start using dof, the blurring on close objects can almost let you see in behind them slightly and makes the effect fall apart. The other second big issue is that a depth channel is only saving a single value per pixel, and if you have an anti aliased edge between two objects, that pixel is half one object, and half the other object. The Depth channel will only save a value for the object closer to camera, so you're missing data for the further away object so the depth blur effect gets issues.

As deex mentions, one way to make this a bit better is to use deep compositing which WILL let you save information for objects in behind the objects closest to camera, including depth information. They're much heavier files and you'll have to use a compositing software that supports deep images like nuke or fusion though.

[bigbossfr]

http://peregrinelabs.com/bokeh/