Got DOF with 1.1.22?
Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2005 5:42 pm
Is anyone able to get DOF with the latest 1.1.22 release in Maya? I'm not seeing any.
I'll post the scene if you want it.
Maxwell Render | Official public forum
The official Maxwell Render public forum. A place to share your latest projects and be inspired by others, or get help and feedback from the Maxwell community
https://forum.maxwellrender.com/
Got DOF with 1.1.22?
Page 1 of 3
Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2005 6:24 pm
I get DOF with the standart Maxwell camera just adjusting the target .
I'll post the scene if you want it.
I'll post the scene if you want it.
Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2005 6:27 pm
guys - inetersting... I'm using an fstop of 2 with a 200mm lens which gives me a very narrow focal region (i.e. my front focal plane and rear focal plane are very close together) but everything outside of that is STILL in focus. Sure I can set the focal distance very close to the camera and get everything to blur, however, I'm not able to preciszely pinpoint my focus - doesn't seem right... especially for my camera settings... I should be getting massive DOF blurring..... any ideas?
what are you guys' lens settingsd for the above images? (just curious)
Thanks!
BTW, I'm using maya 6.0
what are you guys' lens settingsd for the above images? (just curious)
Thanks!
BTW, I'm using maya 6.0
Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2005 6:39 pm
DELETED
Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2005 6:54 pm
I haven't change in those images any camera parameter, just the focal distance using the aim.
Focal lenght: 35mm
Shutter: 60
F-Stop:5.6
Focal lenght: 35mm
Shutter: 60
F-Stop:5.6
Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2005 11:31 pm
my scale is correct, yet I get NOTHING....
Betty, how are you defining a NikoLens?
Betty, how are you defining a NikoLens?
Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2005 12:14 am
OK I just did a simple test with some spheres in a straight line on a ground plane - I could get DOF going however the Near foacal and far focal planes in the cmaera settings didn't remotely respond to what I saw viually - to focus on an object 220 CM away, I had to change my focal depth to like 30 cm which gave me a near cfucas of 30 CM and a far of 40 CM (roughly) the thing is that the obkect 210 CM away WAS in focus and everything behind that, blurred.... what the heck is going on here - are you guys looking at the near and far plnes? or are you just moving the camera aim around until it looks good.... something seems amiss.... if you do a render through Maya though with DOF turned on the entered values return what i'd expect!?!?!?
Something is still wrong.
Something is still wrong.
Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2005 12:48 am
DELETED
Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:12 am
Betty,
I mailed the scene to you and, in doing so, found the camera creation bug... remember to open the scene twice to get the intended view!
Thanks - jep
I mailed the scene to you and, in doing so, found the camera creation bug... remember to open the scene twice to get the intended view!
Thanks - jep
Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2005 10:35 am
DELETED
Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:27 am
Thanks for takin' a look Betty!
If any one else would like to have a crack at it, just PM me.
If any one else would like to have a crack at it, just PM me.
Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 2:45 am
jep, i'm trying to pm you without success, so if you see this email me at rvenino@gmail.com (so curious about this bug)
Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:17 am
Iker,
sorry bud, I've been at work - can't check the forum like the junkie I am!
I sent you mail - check it out!
BTW,
sid looked at the file as well - NOTHING...
keep in mind, I can get the image to blur - my point is that the DOF has nothing to do with the near and far focal planes (which it SHOULD!) - totally unpredictable - OR, I'm hoping you can find the fatal flaw!
sorry bud, I've been at work - can't check the forum like the junkie I am!
I sent you mail - check it out!
BTW,
sid looked at the file as well - NOTHING...
keep in mind, I can get the image to blur - my point is that the DOF has nothing to do with the near and far focal planes (which it SHOULD!) - totally unpredictable - OR, I'm hoping you can find the fatal flaw!
Posted: Sun Mar 13, 2005 12:37 am
mattWilson - zip up your scene and email it to me: jeptha@gmail.com
I had very similar issues and Iker shed some light on them... I have to agree it is a bit wonky however, scale is a major factor.
I had very similar issues and Iker shed some light on them... I have to agree it is a bit wonky however, scale is a major factor.
Posted: Sun Mar 13, 2005 12:54 am
to elaborate, the thing that puzzles me is this:
In my scne I sent iker and betty, my scale seemed reasonable but no DOF - Iker scaled it down considerably and got all kinds of DOF. mOre importantly the Near and Far Focal plane numbers actually were corresponding with the DOF I'd get... In the larger scale they weren't at all - this seems wrong - the focal planes should work regardless of scale - objects in a photograph are not blurred based on relative scale to the world, they are blurred as a side effect of the optics - i.e. An object in the extreme foreground would get blurred the same, whether it be an edge of a door, or the side of enormous sky scraper.
I work in centimeters and assume 1CM = 1CM. Real world units right? That's what we need to keep maxwell correct, right? So, what is the magic scale that makes the Maxwell camera act (react) correctly? As I asked Iker, is it just a crap shoot or is there a method to the madness?
Thanks all for your input!
In my scne I sent iker and betty, my scale seemed reasonable but no DOF - Iker scaled it down considerably and got all kinds of DOF. mOre importantly the Near and Far Focal plane numbers actually were corresponding with the DOF I'd get... In the larger scale they weren't at all - this seems wrong - the focal planes should work regardless of scale - objects in a photograph are not blurred based on relative scale to the world, they are blurred as a side effect of the optics - i.e. An object in the extreme foreground would get blurred the same, whether it be an edge of a door, or the side of enormous sky scraper.
I work in centimeters and assume 1CM = 1CM. Real world units right? That's what we need to keep maxwell correct, right? So, what is the magic scale that makes the Maxwell camera act (react) correctly? As I asked Iker, is it just a crap shoot or is there a method to the madness?
Thanks all for your input!