Page 2 of 2

Re: In search of a depth of field plugin

Posted: Thu May 16, 2019 2:39 am
by thibaud

I'm not too sure what's the point of this reply @JUNE
You specifically ask garuda for his source images,.. to end up replying something along the lines of: "look I can do it better than you, but I'm not going to tell you how".

Cheers to @theotheo for his insightful and kind reply (as always).


Re: In search of a depth of field plugin

Posted: Thu May 16, 2019 3:08 am
by JUNE
garuda wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 9:58 pm

Thanks for trying, June.
I guess that something is happening in that CGS_NormalZ node, which I suppose is a proprietary plugin (and maybe the DepthofField too?).
I'm not quite sure whether is a tool that can be installed on the free version or if I need the Studio version.

Any tips you could share in case there's a way to fix the edges artifacts using the standard built-in tools or the ones available through Reactor?
I would appreciate it.

Best,
Piero

Added in 10 minutes 42 seconds:

bowserlm wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 12:57 am

Use an Erode/Dilate on your depth image to tweak exactly where that intersection is. Use masks to localize the Erode/Dilate effect if you need to do it only around certain areas.

Thank you, bowserlm

That would help but is not very practical. It sure helps for a still image, but when it comes to animations the workflow becomes cumbersome and time-consuming.
Also, in this case, the image I prepared is pretty basic. With overlapping geometry it can be a true pain.

NormalZ Uploaded


Re: In search of a depth of field plugin

Posted: Thu May 16, 2019 3:36 am
by theotheo

Spent a few more minutes tweaking the setup, by slicing it into fg and bg objects, the pixels of the edges of the fg objects no longer "bleed" into the distance (due to antialiasing and interpolation on the geo) giving a much much cleaner and predictable result.


Re: In search of a depth of field plugin

Posted: Thu May 16, 2019 2:23 pm
by garuda

First off, thank you so much @theotheo for taking not only the time to test this on your end, but also for the detailed explanation! I really appreciate that. I read somewhere that this forum is one of the nicest around and I can see why.
Also, thank you June for uploading your plugin, very kind of you, I'll give it a try.

For what concerns the test I posted, yes, the example has a quite shallow depth of field, but after all not so extreme.
Thus, I did another test in AE + Frischluft and I can definitely keep pushing it without noticing serious artifacts:

DIANA_RS assemble (00000).jpg

But then I thought that to make this a fair comparison I shouldn't be testing against Frischluft but rather the built-in AE Camera Lens Blur and the results aren't good at all. I always relied on either Frischluft or Sapphire Z-Defocus, therefore, my references have always been pretty much the highest level achievable (at least in the AE territory).

I guess at this point it becomes a matter of whether BMD will ever introduce a more advanced tool or not for this type of situations. If they ever will, it will definitely be a huge gift and will surely be very welcome. But I also realize that would be really an extra gift on top of what Fusion itself is! :)

Thank again to all the users who responded here.
The more I use Fusion the more I like it. I think it can definitely become an important asset of my arsenal.

P.S. @theotheo I could finally look at your examples on my monitor, in the second round looks like you're getting a very clean result! I wonder though how long it takes to go over that setup and adjust it for different cases. Anyway, I'll study what you did, which I guess it'll keep me busy for a while since I've just started with Fusion :)