Maxwell Render | Official public forum

This is an oldy but i have to mention this again... it's a must and greatly missed function in 1.1

Agreed Bakbek, and good to see you again! Welcome back!

Yes, it is VERY important.
Ernesto

is this topic supposed to be labeled camera shiFt? or just camera shit in general?

sorry .... i couldnt resist

Didn't notice that

yeah dudes, some of dat camera shit tis necessary, for real!!

oh yes please, i would sav e me hours on my current job!

with exact movement of the film in x & y and the possibility to tild the film angle. like one of these 7000.- linhof cameras

cheers
stefan

I think he means Shift and Tilt....

E

absolutely, shift mostly, then for focus tilt but i think most of us are looking for a shift function. it must not be all that difficult.

also i find the image aspect and height and width confusing. when i want to do a panorama like 6x17 i have to recalculate the pixels for this since when I change it in the frame size the pixel aspect changes and this distorts my image obviously.
so what i do now i type 60 by 170 pixels and fix the image aspect and then change the pixels to for example 2400 and then automatically the hight will be 847. it works but it isn't how it should work. or am i doing something stupid.

fv wrote:absolutely, shift mostly, then for focus tilt but i think most of us are looking for a shift function. it must not be all that difficult.

also i find the image aspect and height and width confusing. when i want to do a panorama like 6x17 i have to recalculate the pixels for this since when I change it in the frame size the pixel aspect changes and this distorts my image obviously.
so what i do now i type 60 by 170 pixels and fix the image aspect and then change the pixels to for example 2400 and then automatically the hight will be 847. it works but it isn't how it should work. or am i doing something stupid.

AFAIK pixel and image aspect ratios are different things!
If you make a pis say 1600*1200 you get IMAGE aspect ratio of 4:3 with PIXEL aspect of 1:1 (aka square pixel)
When you modify the pixel aspect you can adapt the image to specific conditions, where the media you show youd image on doesn't have square pixels!
TV screens are a good example of non square pixels.

Hi Boris, sorry to say but i have no clue what you mean by your reply. Maybe you can explain, I am interested.

fv wrote:Hi Boris, sorry to say but i have no clue what you mean by your reply. Maybe you can explain, I am interested.

Hmm. I definitely need more practice in English %)

I mean, why do you try to change the film size at all?
Isn't it easier to uncheck "keep image aspect" and just type in the resolution you need? More than that! If you later check the "keep image aspect" box once again, it wil automatically adjust the res to the image aspect you typed in before! The frame size that changes the PIXEL aspect is the size of the virtual film, i haven't figured the use to it, except that the depth of field varies if the film size is changed (told by photographers).
But the values are not pixels but millimeters.
the easiest way is to manually type in the resolution of 2400*847 and hit render.

Pixel aspect is useful if you are going to display images or animations on displays that have non square pixels, ie television sets, and I think projectors. On the computer screen a sphere rendered with any other pixel aspect than square will look squashed or stretched, but when you'll see it on a tv it will look round.

But if you're just going to show them on computer screens, then leave pixel aspect at 1 and change the rez directly like Boris suggested.

ok, thanks Boris and Mihai,
i am a photographer and so i have a technical camera, just thought i could change the frame dimensions to a 6x17 or 4x5 inch film size. Did not work and had to adjust the settings with the pixel numbers. Its ok too but I had to get used to it. I see that the actual frame size could have been skipped from the interface really.

Mihai wrote:Pixel aspect is useful if you are going to display images or animations on displays that have non square pixels, ie television sets, and I think projectors. On the computer screen a sphere rendered with any other pixel aspect than square will look squashed or stretched, but when you'll see it on a tv it will look round.

But if you're just going to show them on computer screens, then leave pixel aspect at 1 and change the rez directly like Boris suggested.

That's exactly what i meant! Thanks Mihai!

Mihai wrote:Pixel aspect is useful if you are going to display images or animations on displays that have non square pixels, ie television sets, and I think projectors. On the computer screen a sphere rendered with any other pixel aspect than square will look squashed or stretched, but when you'll see it on a tv it will look round.

But if you're just going to show them on computer screens, then leave pixel aspect at 1 and change the rez directly like Boris suggested.

And I forgot to say that most projectors known to me have similar pixel aspect as computer monitors.