[tom]

in reallife normally you can have this with a proper shutter but you have unlimited subframes... this is why...
but if we have just 2 subframes, i bet you have no chance...
that's why i said "at least more than 1/1...." just for a fantasy instead of more subframes

[Mihai]

it's still timelapse (higher framerate at projection than when shooting) you would get timelapse with big motionblur

aah, ok! Thanks for taking the time with the explanations May I ask what it is you work with? Please don't tell me you're sitting in front of a computer all day like the rest of us......

[hdesbois]

Here is an example of crazy (and physicaly impossible motion blur) :

But this was not dome in Maxwell. I do not think it's possible...yet.
30 fps and 2 sec shutter speed (or 6000°!). glowing cube along a spline. 60 frames, this the 60th.
(LW+Fprime)
HD.

[tom]

btw/ when we're talking about movie film we generally use 24p instead of fps... hehehe
the time is running out carmen... would you like to attempt rendering what i said?
thank you hdesbois... this is what i was talking about..

[tom]

...and hdesbois, it is not true that it is physically impossible...
with open shutter more is possible and i'm always having this with my zorki...

[hdesbois]

Right, Tom, this is Highly possible in still photography, that's why I will advocate for the implementation of this feature in Maxwell, and for a reason : it's obvious that a good part of Maxwell renders will be stills. And sometimes you need a good motion blur to suggest the motion in a still. The it would be very cool to have, sort of, "keyframed motion blur", ie, not just interpolating between 2 frames, but having a whole 2 or 3 second motion blured all the way, even if it isn't straight line. Car lights a night are just an example. The picture I posted is, in fact, a 2 second shot of a complex movement. You can only do this with the impossible shutter speed trick. So, for physically acurate motion blur in stills, we need "impossible" shutter speeds (and outstanding interpolation, but that's another story).
HD

[tom]

photography is not interleaved and it's progressive that's why i wanted to remind it to you....
23.978 is about traditional cams not the digital ones... like 304,8 dpi is about traditional press... and now its 300
i'd better stick to max and glass maybe but you'd better stay away CG

[tom]

thank you hdesbois, i know this can be easily implemented in CG and I'm crazy sure that Albert will beat it

[tom]

who cares... you can also make one that captures at 23,99999.... they are just doing it for backwards compability... for capturing, postprocessing, printing on film and to be able to play on traditional devices.... doesn't make sense to me..

[rivoli]

opening the renderer up to do impossible stuff (you only can do in other renderers or in post)

mind you carmen, you could end up getting kicked in the forehead, if i'm not mistaken, for stating these crazy things here.

[rivoli]

at least don't say it alound. keep it hush hush.

[rivoli]

jeez, i can't even think about that. don't you ever dare to post anything like that, there are people around here who could just not stand it.

besides, i don't believe you.

btw, say hallo to betty if you happen to meet her.

[hdesbois]

sorry, I have to post this really ugly picture here :


So, this is the same glowing cube that I rendered with a 2 second shutter speed while it was moving (I prefer to put it that way) but this time in Maxwell.
Obviously, you can specify any shutter speed / angle to Maxwell (remember, this is 6000°). It does make a blur for the specified time, but if this time is more than 1 frame, it does not use intermediate frames to compute the blur.
I wish it would, for the sake of low shutter speed still photography lovers.
HD

[tom]

Ok All,

I know a camcorder doesn't have an open shutter as in still cam and 1/24,
1/30 etc. is the usual way to expose the motion for a camcorder and thus
we call its 24 fps or 30 fps etc... So with an ordinary video camera, if you
want to have intense motion blur, then you need really hi-speed things
around (like a running fan). This is all right...

In other hand, with a still cam you can hold shutter open and expose longer
durations which will cause very intense motion blur even for slowly moving objects.
And this is right too...

You all know in real life, time slices between keyframes are infinite. So
the FPS is infinite. The only critera is shutterspeed (even the same for eye)
which determines the still frames of the motion.

But in animation packages, if you need to animate something for 1 sec, it must be corresponding to some exact amount of frames for calculation.
This may seem confusing about having both the FPS and ShutterSpeed here. Yes, right. FPS is nothing to do here if you have a ShutterSpeed.

With ShutterSpeed, time slices between two keyframes are infinite and the speed
of shutter is affecting how fast 1 frame to be captured from this infinite interval.

So we have ShutterSpeed for Maxwell Camera, this is cool. What now? Now we just need time instead of animation frames.
If we say make n frames of animation this doesn't make sense.
For example, now we must say 10 sec of anim shot at 1/25 shutter.

So this is where this thread comes from...

I mean, when setting up timeline how do you consider the motion is for what secs?
Since we don't have infinite fraction of time in the timeline. We still must
tell the application that n frames are representing 1 sec. This is not
anything interfering with ShutterSpeed. This is just for handling time...

[tom]

yeah you're right carmen... oh my english ... i tried to tell that...
of course time is not infinite, the slices of time is infinite i mean