Vlado ..
im sure this would be possible in vray now, is this something that can be implimented for future builds ?
http://www.hc.ic.i.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~kaki/paper/PG2004/Kakimoto2004GlarePresen.pdf
Wow, good reading - The math turned my brain to jelly though :lol:
ooohh nice!
This is what I was asking for in the V-Ray development poll
Oh man I hope we get this. 
Nice read indeed, and talk about simulation…
The fake eyelashes on the camera made my day 
Lele
yes..I have asked for this about 3 years ago
ja would be fantastic!!
pretty neat. It would need to be able to be rendered out separately in another pass, or it would be a little too destructive to a render for my taste.
in other renderers such as maxwell and, I gather, fryrender, this is applied as a post effect on full float outputs. maxwell’s glare for example works exactly as described in the paper, with apertures and obstacles (like eyelashes) maps.
The maxwell glare seem to be a post process only, because you can load an image and apply a glare effect. So, this could be done at Vray frame buffer level too or with a photoshop plugin. Do somebody know a photoshop plugin?
I ask me: is a 3D application necessary or is it done with image processing allways?.
well it would be nice, for the 3d program to have the capability to do it, in full float, with physically correct flaring etc where applicable. Straight post process, is frequently just what looks good to your eye.
we usually do that kind of things in post using nuke…in full float…does the trick mostly.
Thorsten
yeah. the comercial with the dancing robots has some awsome glares.
ya but are they physically accurate based upon the camera and such, or are they ‘faked’ by eye?
I think the easiest way to get correct scaling , shift and obscuration would be to do it 3D
This would be a great feature for us, especially if it could be done in the vray Frame buffer in post and fully adjustable..
The only thing about physical accuracy is to what extents does it support different lenses? Still and film camera? 35mm, 70mm or anamorphic? One type of physical lens is useless if it isn’t the type you’re trying to match. I’d presume that Thorsten is doing it by eye in this case.
I would think it should work in conjunction with the physcam, modeling according to the camera settings.
Just that the look of the flare is caused by the quality of the lens and the amount and shape of elements which is something the physical camera doesn’t do. Maxwell does model stuff like the internal glass in the lens but if you think of the thousands of lenses available I still reckon you’d need to use a third party lens flare generator for effects work. don’t get me wrong something like this could be very very useful, in fact arnold had it years ago - it was in use by a company that did a lot of stage lighting so they requested the flare and glow feature but that said they weren’t trying to match it to other lens flares in film footage for example.
Interesting although the math is way over my head. 
Just out of curiousity - how else are you guys/gals handling these flares in an application such as Photoshop?
Knoll light is the standard - you can get it to place a flare using alpha as location and rgb as colour so if you render a matte pass using only your light objects it’ll do the rest - in after effects it’ll track them too and flare up / down as they get occluded. Still not perfect but the best we have.