OTOY Forums

However It would be reasonable to include some kind of curve controler that is connected to the samples.
Why?
Well, you might have a camera position that requires few samples, lets say seeing a car on a ground from distance, but as we get closer the car needs more samples, to get a uniform noise you need to gradually up the sample cap. This could be done with a user Curve control over a timeline. That you could Key in and apply a bezier or the like to.

There is no reason to find the worse part of the scene, fix your samples to this and then render overkill on a larger proportion of the sequence that doesnt need that many samples.

- mads

If the object is further away it would take less time to render even with cap of 500 samples, but I really like the idea of an curve controller for it. Maybe with a connection to the distance meter, so the curve will be set automaticly depending on the distance of the object to the camera.

Its would be even more easy to just

Move the timeline to point A
Change maxsamples (autokeyed)
Move the timeline to point B
Change maxsamples (autokeyed)

Auto interpolation in/out smoothed

But having different curves methods is important
Not only to control samples, but to turn on a light
For example a neon doesn't turn on linearly, it also blink a little bit before starting up
And while he blink he emmit colored light (slightly)

So to mimic a perfect neon, you need to be able to animate two parameters using custom curves and controls points

meleseDESIGN wrote:If the object is further away it would take less time to render even with cap of 500 samples, but I really like the idea of an curve controller for it. Maybe with a connection to the distance meter, so the curve will be set automaticly depending on the distance of the object to the camera.

would work in some situations not all. 99% of 3d scenes has more than 1 object, so which should be analysed? the one in front or the one in back, that will be messy. let alone the fact a box with a tiny hole renders super fast from outside...but try go inside it Curve editor would come handy there.

I would refrain from auto interpolation. Simple beziers would be optimal.

I would refrain from auto interpolation. Simple beziers would be optimal.

There's a lot of way to auto-interpolate (in, in-out, out, cubic etc..)
Also after the auto-interpolation you can still tweak the controls point

So I don't see why it would be bad

Auto is fine with ability to tweak all aspects as the user feel fit.

But its realy easy to port a interpolation to keys so its not realy an issue. The manual work tools costs extra man hours to produce, not the other way around.

andrian wrote:all though boxes penetrating other boxes,

From an artistic non-scientific angle anything works. We could make boxes collapse into a tiny compact pile of boxes and it would still look good as long as it had nerve.

I haven't tried it yet, but in creative Crash (if I remember correctly) I found a little mel script or something like that that exported each frame in a scene to a sequence of obj's. Might be worth looking into, but again, I don't know if it works or not. Sounds good though!

By the way, great animation!

yeah man, you can write batch export frames to obj, sub folders..
Think Radiance is adding some grabber for that, might be worthy to write that script and stick up a smalll tests pack with obj sequences.

XSI 's OBJ exporter support OBJ sequences , straight from the package ( just if someone wants to know )