Originally posted by yotambien
View Post
Once I got past viewing the fourth dimension, it was already too late... I had posted the second video also and too bad the editing is a one minute limit here...
Besided... Anything past what we already considder 'real' is seemingly unmessurable. e=mc^2... heh... yeah... Even the LHC is one big pile of pseudo science if you look at it that way. What's next? CERNs gravity detector... You have theory, seemingly proven theory and scientifically proven theory. The rest is all science guilt 1 versus science guilt 2. "They are wrong!" -"No they are wrong!", "Your theory is pseudo science!" -"No you only hate my methods because they differ from the established one!", and so forth and so forth. Bunch of criebabies that will never know for sure. They only demand that they do... History repeats itself, you know? Let me be clear though that I am not claiming that the omniverse is correct, however with realtime rendering time is a single dimensional problem and let us leave it at that, pretty please...
But lets get back to the subject before this ends in a giant flamewar...
What motion blur are we talking about here? Motion blur as in blurred motion on film. We have HDR and bloom for games. Everything is a frame and so we talk about the kind of motion blur that you get when you photograph a scene that is moving at such speed in respect to the camera that multiple images land on one frame. Tada. This is also done with screencaptures, which comes closest to exact representages of the Desired Effect (TM).
Yes, when one puts enough frames on there you get the smudgy effect thingy, true... But if you look at it than truely correct motion blur is a mix of older images and the older they are, the less strongly they appear on the 'photo' that the camera takes like in real life.
Leave a comment: