CompuServe Thread

#LenZFX and fields?!

28 messages in this thread
#159016From: Jim LammersMar 15, 1995 12:38 AM
Has anyone successfully got fields to work with LenzFX? I can't get anything to render with a field effect. I keyframed an omni light and assigned the LenZFX flare to it. I also keyframed an object to move similarly in the same camera view. But no matter what, when rendering, the flare is stuck in one place, while the object is properly field rendered. Am I missing something? Or does Digimation not work with video output much (I bought MAGIC from them, and it has never worked with fields either). Jim
#159018From: James BieblMar 15, 1995 12:55 AM
Jim >>Has anyone successfully got fields to work with LenzFX? Not I. I was just zipping up a project for DavidA with the same questions. My flare moves, but not with fields. I hope we're both missing the same thing. We shall see. JB
#159145From: Mike KelleyMar 15, 1995 2:16 PM
>Has anyone successfully got fields to work with LenzFX? I can't get anything to >render with a field effect. I keyframed an omni light and assigned the LenZFX >flare to it. I always render to fields, and this past weekend I used both the Flare and the StarLight routines and they rendered correctly to fields. Flare I used on a SpotLight that arced across the screen, and it looked great. Starlight I used on a broadsword model (by brightness) as it rotated. At least they LOOKED okay — usually I can tell during the recording whether something is in fields or not. I suppose there's always the possibility that, even though I specified fields, that the resultant TGAs were actually rendered to frames, but it doesn't sound like that's your problem. The animations sure looked smooth on tape, though.
#159158From: Aaron W. OstlerMar 15, 1995 3:22 PM
Jim, LenZFX automatically detects whether you are rendering to fields or frames and adjusts accordingly. However, just as an aside, any post image processing will always look better in frame mode, just ask Steven Spielberg <g>. Especially if you have a lot of things moving around at very high speeds. Aaron
#159198From: Mike KelleyMar 15, 1995 8:29 PM
>However, just as an aside, any post image processing will always look better in >frame mode, just ask Steven Spielberg <g> Is this really true? I'd sure like Gary to comment on this, as my understanding was that it was nearly ALWAYS better to use fields (the exception being a still or some image held for a period of time). Isn't the animation smoother this way, or am I wasting my rendering time?
#159238From: Yost GroupMar 16, 1995 12:32 AM
I think that Aaron's point was that, if you're post-processing an image that was rendered in field mode, you've got to be using a filter that knows about fields in bitmaps (which almost no filters do). That's why LenZFX (and our own IXP's) uses the KFScene… all the field information is easily accessible there. Of course, it IS always best to use fields when rendering to videotape, since that's the way video works. It's just that sometimes, under certain conditions, it's impossible. – G
#159209From: Paul Sanford [LVL5]Mar 15, 1995 9:39 PM
>> However, just as an aside, any post image processing will always look better in frame mode, just ask Steven Spielberg <g>. Especially if you have a lot of things moving around at very high speeds. << Could you clarify why this is, Aaron…? Thanks. Paul S.
#159247From: Aaron W. OstlerMar 16, 1995 1:30 AM
There are several differences in 3DS from an IPAS viewpoint when rendering in fields or frames, but it basically all boils down to one difference. When rendering in fields mode, 3DS will actually render say frame 1 at the even scan-lines, then reposition all the meshes in the keyframer and then make a second pass rendering at frame 1.5 for the odd scan-lines. These two images will be composited into one final frame. This is why if you look at one image rendered in field mode it will actually look a little offset from line to line. And when you do a freeze frame on a VCR that is playing a field recorded animation it will "jiggle". The theory goes that field rendering is smoother than frame rendering because video will make two passes for each image, one the even scanlines and one the odd scanlines. However, using video output devices that can operate more quickly than PAR, you actually get 60 fields instead of 30 fields, and thereby reduces the jitter. It's really all a matter of personal preference and what output hardware you have available to you. But if you can work with 60 fields, rendering to frames, it will look better. Aaron
#159306From: Tim Krego, [pro.image]Mar 16, 1995 11:14 AM
>>>The theory goes that field rendering is smoother than frame rendering because video will make two passes for each image, one the even scanlines and one the odd scanlines. However, using video output devices that can operate more quickly than PAR, you actually get 60 fields instead of 30 fields, and thereby reduces the jitter. It's really all a matter of personal preference and what output hardware you have available to you. But if you can work with 60 fields, rendering to frames, it will look better.<<< My understanding is that the PAR does 60 fields per second. And in video 2 fields make up one frame. When doing any animation to video tape I think field rendering is smoother than frame rendering, especially for fast moving objects or those close to the camera.
#159397From: Don LandisMar 16, 1995 9:04 PM
You all are making this field thing more complicated than necessary. Tim, you're pretty close to the truth on this. The real reason that fields are smoother than frames in video is because the motion is more finely divided in time 60 increments rather than 30 increments per second. As in the case of some computer video, it's 15 increments per second and this has a real jerky motion. All NTSC video output devices, including the PAR and lower end devices will output 60 fields per second. This is an NTSC standard. The fields are interlaced as you know. To output only frames signifies that the video would be non-interlaced and this will not display properly on NTSC monitors. 3DS only handles the rendering at either 30 increments per second or 60 increments per second. It does not actually generate scanning beams for display as this is the crux of the analog video process. Actually, I think 3DS generates the picture in chunks in the digital process but I might be wrong on this. To achieve the smoothness the 60 increments or pictures must be interlaced into one frame or picture. As the picture is sampled in the output device the signal is in sync with an electron beam in the display monitor and the end result is that first one picture is displayed (odd field) then since the persistance of the picture tube holds the first field while the second field is drawn with just a bit of displacement from the motion 1/60th of a second later. When we watch this image on the screen the percieved motion is 60 pictures per second while the actual picture frame rate is 30 per second. This was done mainly to keep the bandwidth of the video signal to a minimum to to conserve the radio spectrum and maintain a reasonable cost in the video equipment technology. I would suggest all of you get a good primer on how video is constructed from the viewpoint of the electron beam so you have a better understanding of the entire process. For kindergarten starters try reading chapter 5 of 3D Studio Tips and Tricks Series: TECHNICAL TIPS by Michele Bousquet. pages 67 and 68. Beyond this try "The Life of an NTSC Video signal for 1 Second" by JVC. or Today's Video by Peter Utz. Now if you're really getting into this you can graduate to the Television Engineer's Handbook by Benson and Whitaker. See ya next year <BG>
#159490From: Tim Krego, [pro.image]Mar 17, 1995 10:49 AM
>>>You all are making this field thing more complicated than necessary. Tim, you're pretty close to the truth on this.<<< I'm not up on the technical stuff, but I learned all about 60fps when I got my Video Toaster in 1990. The Amiga was great for its NTSC compatibility. >>>Actually, I think 3DS generates the picture in chunks in the digital process but I might be wrong on this.<<< I noticed 3DS renders the odd fields then the even fields, or the other way around, after thinking 3DS was rendering the same frame twice.
#162022From: Frank ZuccaroMar 31, 1995 7:40 PM
I'm late on this one. As a dealer who actually dare's to delve into such things… I think your efforts towards LenzFX are tremendous. This is the most killer, cool IPAS routine yet. We're rendering wow grade stuff for demo's with it for an upcoming user group meeting. On behalf of the dealer channel, thanks.
#159410From: sherwood egbertMar 16, 1995 10:22 PM
i think you have your imformation backwards , it better in field than frames.
#159539From: Paul Sanford [LVL5]Mar 17, 1995 3:00 PM
SE to AO >> i think you have your imformation backwards , it better in field than frames. << That was why I thought it was curious why Aaron said Steven Spielberg preferred frames to fields for post image processing. I understand how fields/frames work, I just want to know what he meant. Aaron? Paul S.
#159595From: Mar 17, 1995 11:08 PM
Paul: >> That was why I thought it was curious why Aaron said Steven Spielberg >> preferred frames to fields for post image processing. I understand how >> fields/frames work, I just want to know what he meant. I'm just guessing, but since StevenS works mainly on the big screen in film, which does not have fields, he would prefer it to video fields. Greg Pyros
#159648From: Paul Sanford [LVL5]Mar 18, 1995 11:13 AM
Spielberg… film vs. video… frames vs. fields… Doh! :-0 (Homer Simpson sound) Thanks, Paul
#159836From: Mar 20, 1995 10:54 AM
Paul: >>>> Spielberg… film vs. video… frames vs. fields… >> Doh! :-0 (Homer Simpson sound) <g> Greg Pyros
#159189From: bill "digr" lundeenMar 15, 1995 7:38 PM
Hi, I have successfully rendered fields with every effect available in LenZFX. FYI. bill
#159230From: andrew gordonMar 15, 1995 11:49 PM
what is LensFX? Whats it do and who makes it? Is it any good? Thanks, Andrew G.
#159235From: Tim c BrananMar 16, 1995 12:26 AM
LenZFX is distributed by Digimation, and written by Aaron Ostler. At it's most basic, it is a re-working of the Yost Group Disk #1, but 1000% better. At the moment it does four types of things: Aura: This is like the glow routine from disk #1, you can make an object glow on different parameters, such as: by edge, by object, hue, and so forth. Flare: The creates a lens flare, though just saying that doesn't do it justice. You can simulate the sun, headlights, all sorts of stuff. Starlight: This produces little twinkles of light, you can set it up similar to aura. and lastly: Blur: The blurs an image to simulate a focusing camera. the entire package is VERY user definable and extremely versatile, plus it has one of the coolest IPAS interfaces around. I wanted this routine badly since I first saw it right before it was officially released a couple of months ago and finally plunked down my money last week. Now I am a aura and flare-happy fiend. I believe Digimation is having a special and selling it at $295 ($100 off reg. price). I don't know when it ends.
#159391From: bill "digr" lundeenMar 16, 1995 7:50 PM
LenZFX is one of the great routines by Aaron Ostler and Gary Gosha. It is similar to all the lens effects that were on Yosts' disk one, with some great improvments! Digimation carries it. Call them for details. 18008544496. bill
#159524From: CSA/CAMar 17, 1995 1:52 PM
Bill, Let me clarify one thing for the listeners out there in Studio land. Digimation "distributes" a line of 3D Studio plug-ins (& video tape training materials), as does Schreiber Instruments, Pyros, HSC, Positron, etc. While they will sell direct, their offerings are ALSO made available through many of the multimedia dealers. In addition, a number of dealers might even provide check or credit terms and shipping to their users, vs. immediate credit card or COD payment required by most of the distributors. Kevin Krell – Computer Support Associates
#159565From: bill "digr" lundeenMar 17, 1995 5:40 PM
Kevin, Weeelll! I forgot that you mentioned you would be carrying IPAS routines as well. I didnt intend to favor Digimation. I simply have dealt with them for IPASes. Sorry if you felt slighted. Next time I answer a question like that I will mention several sources then tag on an eg:. Bill
#159579From: CSA/CAMar 17, 1995 6:55 PM
Bill, Not slighted, really. I just think that users desiring the product shouldn't be crowded into a "sole source" scenario that ain't true. But I admit I'd like a bigger piece of the pie, and have made the commitments to deserve it <g>! Now if I could only compete with the da!n bookstores on 3DS books. Kevin Krell – Computer Support Associates
#159658From: bill "digr" lundeenMar 18, 1995 2:07 PM
*** Now if I could only compete with the da!n bookstores on 3DS books. *** It is tough to compete with Crown Books and Bookstar. And unless you are able to do a large volume business it will get old Schlepping those heavy packages around!
#159665From: ROBERT RITGERMar 18, 1995 2:57 PM
Kevin: FWIW, Your commitment is obvious, your support here is top quality. /_______________________From your message________________________\\ But I admit I'd like a bigger piece of the pie, and have made the commitments to deserve it <g>! __________________________________________________________________ So, send me a catalog or a listing of what you offer. Let's do business! Bob
#159694From: John K. JordanMar 18, 1995 10:44 PM
>>IPASses & stuff… Kevin, What is your phone number? I am getting ready to make some major purchases (i.e. outfit a lab at work). Do you deal in hardware too, or just software? I need 4-6 machines, network-ready, with all the fixings. JKJ
#159625From: david W. mennenohMar 18, 1995 9:32 AM
Jim, I haven't had any problems with fields and LenzFX but you are correct about Magic. I've always got to render the magic by itself to frames and composite them back in. Good luck though. DM