http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas en-us Fri, 21-Nov-2008 00:00:00 UTC Fri, 21-Nov-2008 00:00:00 UTC QAPoll module http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/373/
Similar to Shake's Time tab.

Attachments:
No attachments. ]]> Fri, 21-Nov-2008 00:00:00 UTC http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/373/ http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/405/
Example #1 CROSS FADING: As with the current implementation, the sequencer has a "Cross" effect used to achieve cross fading. This seems duplicated with the nodal compositor's "Mix" node. In an ideal world, the cross fading would be achieved through a pipeline into the nodal compositor. This would group allow for greater tweaking of the cross fade as well as providing a higher level of abstraction for quick application of a cross fade via the sequencer.

Example #2 BLUR: In a similar fashion to the above example, the "Blur" effect is also duplicated via the nodal compositor's tool base. Unifying the two aspects of the application would be useful for final post production polishing.

Example #3 TIME LINE: In some instances, harnessing the curve adjustment on a time node is more complicated than adjusting the time line in the sequencer. If the two were bound together, either adjustment would suffice and provide a much enhanced experience for the end-user.

In closing, more tightly integrating the sequencer with the nodal compositor would allow for a great number of positive outcomes for the Blender project, not limited to:

1) Stability. Developing only _one_ effect / node code set is far more effective than having to maintain two or more. Consider the examples above.
2) Consistency. Harnessing the same algorithms for a desired effect would increase the consistency obtained through Blender usage in output product.
3) Simplicity. Developing only one set of algorithms would reduce program size when it comes to the availability of plugins and effects.
4) Customized Noodle Effects. A group of nodes would easily be reused within the sequencer to achieve standard canned effects. This might open up avenues to build a noodle library for compositors / editors.

The above suggestion would help to address several of the issues on the current feature request page on the Blender Wiki ( http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Requests/Sequencer ).


Attachments:
Feature Request: Sequencer: [Click link to browse]
]]> Fri, 21-Nov-2008 00:00:00 UTC http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/405/ http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/509/
hope this was understandable... :p

Attachments:
No attachments. ]]> Fri, 21-Nov-2008 00:00:00 UTC http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/509/ http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/441/
1) Compositor should have sequencer input and sequencer output nodes.

2) We need to be able to have any arbitrary number of sequencer timelines and compositor networks (correct term?) as desired. These should be data blocks contained within the scene.

3) Timelines need to be able to have the output from another timeline as an input.

4) Compositor networks need to be able to have the output from another compositor network as an input. (Yes you could have just one big ass compositor network, but this allows for breaking it up into separate data blocks.)

5) The data of the timelines / networks need to be abstracted similar to how we abstract objects and object data.

6) Get rid of the compositor / sequencer rendering options. Both are on by default. If you don't need any compositing or sequencing done, you don't create any compositor node networks or sequencer timelines. (Besides you can't really enable just one if they are as integrated with each other as this proposal is suggesting)

6b) If your scene has compositing networks and/or sequencer timelines, but you still want to do a render without those, there should be toggle button (similar to the current "compositor" and "sequencer" buttons) to enable a "direct render".



Attachments:
No attachments. ]]> Fri, 21-Nov-2008 00:00:00 UTC http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/441/ http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/111/ see http://matthaus.woolard.googlepages.com/blender_node
for more details



Attachments:
No attachments. ]]> Fri, 21-Nov-2008 00:00:00 UTC http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/111/ http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/495/
1) Input->Value is limited to 0..1 - why? Sometimes i need higher values - my workaround is today to use Convertor->Math->Add (value,0)

2) Input numbers are not precise
they are stored precise but can not edited again:
enter 1.0/17 [enter]
and then add *17 [enter]

3) New Node: Input->Real Time
with switch frame/seconds
to get real frame number or
to get real time in seconds (input->time return only value 0..1)

4) New Node: Output->Value
to display current value if possible. This feature could make new blender calculator :-) or you can check values

5) New Node: Distort->Align
Could be useful for watermark-image-effect. Today you can only move images with distort->displace. But this is depend on your output resolution. This new node could align image left/middle/right and top/middle/bottom with additional x/y-space distance

6) New Node: Input->Pick
get color from x/y point from input image
or some extra options (get darkest, get highest color from image without x/y-option)

7) New Node: Color->Warnings
Colorize pixels with a warning color that are over a range 0..1 to show over-highlighted pixels in image


Attachments:
No attachments. ]]> Fri, 21-Nov-2008 00:00:00 UTC http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/495/ http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/679/
Improvements:
- The node curve system should be the same as the IPO curve system.
- Numeric input
- A separate window/canvas to edit the curves on, not that tiny little grid in the node. Maybe even use the IPO window for nodes as well.

Attachments:
No attachments. ]]> Fri, 21-Nov-2008 00:00:00 UTC http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/679/ http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/442/
Many of the compositor nodes modify the image, however they pay no attention to the rendering option "key" or "premultiplied" when dealing with alpha. Generally they process image data using a premultiplied approach.

This can be a real PITA when using blender in combination with 3rd party apps. Especially when you have the "key" option selected for the rendering, and send it to nodes that change things using premultiplied compositing. Then you get this ugly mess that is a mix of both.

Try using a blur node on output rendered with the "key" option set. It totally screws everything up.

Attachments:
No attachments. ]]> Fri, 21-Nov-2008 00:00:00 UTC http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/442/ http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/683/
Personally I think we don't use all the potential of such a node based system by far and it could be developed to a very powerful tool for all kinds of tasks. But instead of implementing lots of new nodes, we could give users more low-level control, so they can build and tweak lots of filters and algorithms by there own.

A good example, what I mean is the already existing filter node, which convolves an image with a filter kernel, a very common task in image processing. It provides a pre-defined list of filters like Sobel, Laplace, Soften, Sharpen,... These filters all define a specific 3*3 kernel matrix, but of course there are lots of other useful and well known filters as the predefined ones.

Standard Sobel:
[1, 2, 1,
0, 0, 0,
-1.-2,-1]

By letting the user entering custom filter matrices of different size, we gain access to many new filters and can experiment and tweak. This can give even control over, vertical and horizontal convolution and how the results get normalized and combined. I coded a quick demo showing the Scharr operator in action ;)

http://atommuell.mum.jku.at/~aurel/sobel_filter_suz.png

More control for convolution isn't enough of course, some more mathematic and logical features would be useful too. As you can see, I even had to implement sqrt in the math node to normalize properly. But also nodes, which provide functionality on a higher level, but don't provide a useful task by there own would be neat (for e.g. region growing).

Some more notes on convolution, this can be done better and faster than it is done at the moment. When you convolve an image with a kernel, there's always the question how to handle the edges. The user should be able to choose several methods here, especially because the current implementation has some mature issues. We could also speed up the entire process by using the Fast Fourier Transformation and passing transformed data from one node to another. This would speed up long chains of filters massively.

Please note, this is not a feature request, this is a proposal of something I or somebody else could implement. Thank you for comments.



Attachments:
No attachments. ]]> Fri, 21-Nov-2008 00:00:00 UTC http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/683/ http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/385/ After that you could tweak the RGB curves node and the factor value would be this "mask"....
This could help for example if you render your image and want to turn color of this blue ball to the red... So you don't have to rerender the whole picture

Attachments:
No attachments. ]]> Fri, 21-Nov-2008 00:00:00 UTC http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/385/ http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/590/
A Random Value node could also be useful to allow for changing values in other nodes. This could be used to help create randomly flickering lights or overall flickering of the scene for example. This could also benefit from the keyframe node, allowing for the user to choose when the flickering occurs and to turn off the random node at certain parts in a sequence.

Attachments:
No attachments. ]]> Fri, 21-Nov-2008 00:00:00 UTC http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/590/ http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/403/ The problem is that they often are anitalised and mixing them with nodes (i.e. "Mix" node) often results in mask-"halos" around some objects.
(EDIT: [Unusable] example of node-mixing http://www.flickr.com/photos/63231715@N00/2494419158)

So a way to combine them before they are converted to a bitmap (if that is even possible) would be quite handy here.

Of course a way to get a non antialised output of the "ID Mask" node might work as well and it may even be more flexible ("Mix" nodes will work correctly on purely BW images)

Example:
Combining mask 1 and mask 2 in this image:
http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Image:Manual-Compositing-Node-IDMask_ex.jpg
Note: No, one can't simple take an inverted 0 mask here, because this is a simplified example and it will break if there are more masks.
The second example (with "halo" around borders") was already linked above.

Disclaimer: I'm still pretty much a noob when it comes to the compositor, so there may already be a way to do this cleanly. C&C welcome.

Werner

Attachments:
No attachments. ]]> Fri, 21-Nov-2008 00:00:00 UTC http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/403/ http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/554/
Attachments:
No attachments. ]]> Fri, 21-Nov-2008 00:00:00 UTC http://www.blenderstorm.org/qapoll/ideas/item/554/