Scratchpole's picture
Shared by on 2018.12.06 09:05

Blur with Mask is a Fake Depth of Field or Tiltshift photography style image filter. This is a development of one of GeorgeToledo 's very useful Quartz Composer constructs.

+0
Interesting
+1
Helpful
+0
Unique

Download composition

AttachmentSize
Binary Data Scratchpole.blurwithMask.vuo8.15 KB

Other categories

Created as a simple test or demonstration

Tested with

Vuo version:
OS version:

Comments

I took a look at the comp and

kingluma's picture
Submitted by

I took a look at the comp and it looks good. Your DOF seems less "fake" than a lot of the DOF you see being faked. At least it's real variable blur that's good quality and seems fast and responsive to work with.

I released a Tilt-Shift DOF simulation effect for Final Cut Pro a few months ago. Mine uses a combination of a Quartz Composer based FxPlug and Apple Motion. I was able to repurpose onscreen UI widgets from the stock effects that come with Motion to give it a decent UI. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdk-f1rJLpo, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iL3X0Cs9-s

Thanks for checking it out.

Scratchpole's picture
Submitted by

Thanks for checking it out. I like the UI you used in yours. It'd be nice to make something similar for this effect in the long run but not really needed for a FFGL as I plan to use it. The x/y controls for the linear gradient can get a bit confusing as it is now.

Ace, thankyou!

Scratchpole's picture
Submitted by

Ace, thankyou!

Needs a tweak to the boolean name to display correctly in Resolume but running well enough. (Or is there a better way to switch between the two styles?). Also noticed that the position sliders numbers do not display minus number positions, they are displayed as 0-1 in Resolume.

I'd love some feedback from anyone else who uses it on faster GPU machines than my own (2012 MBP with GT650m). It's unsurprisingly very slow on UHD movies at full subsampling size/High quality settings for me ;)

Needs a tweak to the boolean

jstrecker's picture
Submitted by

Needs a tweak to the boolean name to display correctly in Resolume but running well enough. (Or is there a better way to switch between the two styles?).

FFGL limits parameter names to 16 chars, so you'd have to pick a shorter name. Or split it into two plugins, one for linear and one for radial.

Also noticed that the position sliders numbers do not display minus number positions, they are displayed as 0-1 in Resolume.

Vuo converts the 0-1 range displayed in Resolume back to the original range in your composition. For example, if your published input port has range -10 to 10, it will display in Resolume as 0-1, but the numbers fed into your composition will range from -10 to 10. An 0.25 in Resolume will become a -5 in your composition.

The reason for doing it that way is a limitation of Resolume (and other FFGL hosts we've looked at). Although the FFGL spec describes a way to override the default 0-1 range, Resolume doesn't support it.

Thanks for the info. I sent

Scratchpole's picture
Submitted by

Thanks for the info. I sent the Resolume team these Effects to test and posed them the same questions. Joris replied with info about how to display different values, so I guess they do support it: 'Input values for sliders are fixed to 0...1 in the FFGL spec. The plugin can display a different value by calling GetParameterDisplay. This can return a char pointer to display whatever string you need.' I guess that might be something you can add under the hood....?

Add comment

Log in or register to post comments