Revisted an old motion blur tool

2012-12-26 20:36:46 by Tanadrine-Studios

I managed to cut down my render times to 1/6th of what it was. Some major render problems/mistakes forced me to do some research/development. The image dev notes explains...

Full Size Image

Revisted an old motion blur tool


You must be logged in to comment on this post.


2012-12-27 03:12:52

I can see the differences in the bottom 2 images! Eureka!

This will also benefit the viewer, as less CPU intensive effects will render quicker and seem more natural. Doing more with less is what made America great. You're going to have one helluva resume!

(Updated ) Tanadrine-Studios responds:

Perhaps a good resume item, heh, but the digital media industry is too damn competitive for my blood.

There's a lot of benefits to keeping render times as low as possible, though I'd still prefer to do multi-pass anti-aliasing because vector blur requires me to chop up my renders into even more layers of compositing. So, the render reduction comes at the cost of complicating my workflow (so, this is kinda like juggling manhours with machinehours). Ah well.

When render times get too high, mistakes and unexpected problems become major problems. I usually like to keep it between 2-4 minutes per frame. That's what the previous episodes clocked at... the main difference between the earlier episodes and this one is that I could fit all of the visual elements into a single file.