Return-Path: Received: from mail-yh0-f47.google.com ([209.85.213.47] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP-TLS id 5398482 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Wed, 05 Mar 2014 18:40:06 +0100 Received: by mail-yh0-f47.google.com with SMTP id c41so1361251yho.20 for ; Wed, 05 Mar 2014 09:40:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=x0uAB1iP/2Bgsajh3uW8wkf8xs0c6moD3JNfZHBfkPI=; b=EsPqCXSHRnN3oM0/iAKqFsIu7AAnYOGux2W+1/Q6w5+2TaGGsOnIL9xPPYyQCkQMeN wazI5i2DKn7YugnYzLu4Yz6GXo/ouwZDTgwdu7ZG6JNy6YOOVv0z0ancXN7n5lcuhxbf kPAykHoKLrJu8MatWlxHuPTLBQls72u5Ek0t0+wSV1D032gEJGLCSJn4qQxm31vAdPcq McuCKfW4K71vENRuPeXiVYIUdSdwWhTUXsnwKyqaqKABMgJU/NSy4wLWqhD/35+437c1 t9xWZIPMIEu452M3WWXM8vWUXKlD1zwskE+8FiWmAwpc0IJSgrPtkbSHSHflW35KnoEC lA9A== X-Received: by 10.236.32.36 with SMTP id n24mr4040587yha.116.1394041236586; Wed, 05 Mar 2014 09:40:36 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.170.160.6 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 09:39:56 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Teddy Gage Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 12:39:56 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [AE] Using optical flow to speed up 3D renders To: After Effects Mail List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c1c2d8b584bf04f3df845c --001a11c1c2d8b584bf04f3df845c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I use AE with depth passes to simulate DoF in 3D scenes, that is a major time saver as true 3D DoF can triple render times. In my experience using reelsmart motion blur, a vector pass is definitely required for anything that's going to be seen close up. Neat video is great but there is little substitute for properly-tuned GI. Might be worth investing more time to learn the renderer than trying to cheat it - Vray can produce super clean results quickly if you invest the time in tweaking the settings and using cached light maps, etc. Overall, I think there would be too much judder for anything with reasonable motion to it with an optical flow plugin replacing frames. However it could be great for slow-moving or stable 3D objects like a CG set extension or other BG replacements. Something that is a principle onscreen like a character or CU of a vehicle etc, you may not be able to get away with, as you could have artifacts and / or framerate issues. In my experience RSMB, even with good vector maps, is still not that close to photorealistic motion blur, and it operates on the same principles. The hours you spend looking for a simple AE cheat may end up better spent on just renting some distributed render farm hours to render everything at full res, prices are pretty reasonable these days. I've had good experiences with renderrocket.com Just my 2c -TG On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 6:48 AM, Chris Zwar wrote: > I have this vague recollection that optical flow technology (e.g. twixtor > and reel smart motion blur) was originally developed to help speed up 3D > rendering workflows. I think the idea was that 3D animators could render > out every 2nd or 3rd frame, and use an optical flow plugin like twixtor to > create the in-betweens. Even if that's not strictly correct, the potential > is there. Some of the photo-realistic projects I've worked on have had 3D > render times of 3 - 5 hours a frame. Rendering every 2nd frame is > effectively halving the overall render time, which can be a massive saving. > Even a slow After Effects plugin is usually only seconds per frame, not > hours. > > So I was wondering if anyone has actually done this, or tried using other > 2D techniques to help speed up 3D rendering. > > I can think of 3 ways in which slow 3D renders can be compensated for by > faster compositing techniques: > > 1) Up-resing. For example rendering at 720p instead of 1080p and scaling > up the finished renders. If compositing multiple passes, only the slow > renders need to be smaller and scaled up. > 2) De-noising. Forgive me for not knowing the correct terminology, but > when rendering with global illumination it seems that there's an overall > quality setting that directly determines both the speed of rendering and > the noisiness of the image. Rendering with a lower setting can make > renders noisier, but a de-noising plugin such as Neat Video can fix this. > 3) As stated above, rendering every 2nd or 3rd frame and using something > like twixtor to create the missing frames. A motion vector pass would make > this more accurate. > > So I'm familiar with 2 of those 3 approaches - I have worked in situations > where 3D passes are rendered at smaller sizes and then scaled up. It works > very well and the time savings can be dramatic when dealing with very long > renders. 3D renders can be so clean that they scale up very well. > > I have also worked in situations where the neat video de-noiser was used > to compensate for noisy GI renders, and again the savings can be dramatic - > in some cases this can almost half 3D rendering times. Neat video seems to > be an incredible plugin, so much faster and so much better than the AE > equivalent. > > So that leaves the optical flow technique as the one I haven't tried yet. > Has anyone done this? I'd love to hear from real-world examples where > people were able to render every 2nd or 3rd frame. Is a motion vector pass > essential for it to work properly? > > Any other thoughts or insight welcome... > > -Chris > +---End of message---+ > To unsubscribe send any message to > -- _____________________________ VFX & Motion Graphic Artist teddygage dot com --001a11c1c2d8b584bf04f3df845c Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I use AE with depth passes to simulate DoF in 3D scenes, t= hat is a major time saver as true 3D DoF can triple render times. In my exp= erience using reelsmart motion blur, a vector pass is definitely required f= or anything that's going to be seen close up. Neat video is great but t= here is little substitute for properly-tuned GI. Might be worth investing m= ore time to learn the renderer than trying to cheat it -  Vray can pro= duce super clean results quickly if you invest the time in tweaking the set= tings and using cached light maps, etc.

Overall, I think there would be too much judder for anything with = reasonable motion to it with an optical flow plugin replacing frames. Howev= er it could be great for slow-moving or stable 3D objects like a CG set ext= ension or other BG replacements. Something that is a principle onscreen lik= e a character or CU of a vehicle etc, you may not be able to get away with,= as you could have artifacts and / or framerate issues.

In my experience RSMB, even with good vector maps, is s= till not that close to photorealistic motion blur, and it operates on the s= ame principles.

The hours you spend looking for a = simple AE cheat may end up better spent on just renting some distributed re= nder farm hours to render everything at full res, prices are pretty reasona= ble these days. I've had good experiences with renderrocket.com Just my 2c
-TG


On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 6:48 AM, Chris Zwar <= chris@chriszwar.com> wrote:
I have this vague recollection that optical = flow technology (e.g. twixtor and reel smart motion blur) was originally de= veloped to help speed up 3D rendering workflows.  I think the idea was= that 3D animators could render out every 2nd or 3rd frame, and use an opti= cal flow plugin like twixtor to create the in-betweens.  Even if that&= #39;s not strictly correct, the potential is there.  Some of the photo= -realistic projects I've worked on have had 3D render times of 3 - 5 ho= urs a frame.  Rendering every 2nd frame is effectively halving the ove= rall render time, which can be a massive saving.  Even a slow After Ef= fects plugin is usually only seconds per frame, not hours.

So I was wondering if anyone has actually done this, or tried using other 2= D techniques to help speed up 3D rendering.

I can think of 3 ways in which slow 3D renders can be compensated for by fa= ster compositing techniques:

1) Up-resing.  For example rendering at 720p instead of 1080p and scal= ing up the finished renders.  If compositing multiple passes, only the= slow renders need to be smaller and scaled up.
2) De-noising.   Forgive me for not knowing the correct terminology, b= ut when rendering with global illumination it seems that there's an ove= rall quality setting that directly determines both the speed of rendering a= nd the noisiness of the image.  Rendering with a lower setting can mak= e renders noisier, but a de-noising plugin such as Neat Video can fix this.=
3) As stated above, rendering every 2nd or 3rd frame and using something li= ke twixtor to create the missing frames.  A motion vector pass would m= ake this more accurate.

So I'm familiar with 2 of those 3 approaches - I have worked in situati= ons where 3D passes are rendered at smaller sizes and then scaled up.  = ;It works very well and the time savings can be dramatic when dealing with = very long renders.  3D renders can be so clean that they scale up very= well.

I have also worked in situations where the neat video de-noiser was used to= compensate for noisy GI renders, and again the savings can be dramatic - i= n some cases this can almost half 3D rendering times.  Neat video seem= s to be an incredible plugin, so much faster and so much better than the AE= equivalent.

So that leaves the optical flow technique as the one I haven't tried ye= t.  Has anyone done this?  I'd love to hear from real-world e= xamples where people were able to render every 2nd or 3rd frame.  Is a= motion vector pass essential for it to work properly?

Any other thoughts or insight welcome…

-Chris
+---End of message---+
To unsubscribe send any message to <ae-list-off@media-motion.tv>



--
_____________________________
<= font style=3D"background-color:rgb(255,255,255)" color=3D"#6aa84f" size=3D"= 1" face=3D"georgia, serif">VFX & Motion Graphic Artist
teddygage dot com
--001a11c1c2d8b584bf04f3df845c--