How do you do depth of field? I mean that I want to imitate the same effect that I get with my camera if I'm focussing on one object and the things behind it are less sharp. Is this the Depth of Field button just above on the right of the navigation ball with the big crossed arrows on it? Or is it something somewhere else?

The DOF options are in the Render options. Don't bother using it, though. The results are garbage compared to what you can do in Photoshop, and in 1/1000th the time it would take Bryce to render such a thing. If you have PS, or PSP, then render a distance mask in Bryce, and use that to drive the DOF blur. Much more efficient, smoother, and more realistic.

That "Rays Per Pixel 64" will increase the number of rays shooting through your scene. Higher numbers will decrease DOF grain, but take it to the max number...and you better let your computer render while you're asleep. ;o) AS

Yet, I have to 2nd what LSD said. I haven't renedered DOF inside of Bryce for probably years now. I can do DOF in Photoshop in seconds (not hours) with VERY smooth blurring, and the change of focus is completely change-able nearly instantly. AS

Oh interesting.. this is a secret I've always wanted to know: how do you use a Bryce distance render as blur mask in photoshop, in order to obtain a DOF effect?

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?Form.ShowMessage=2068898

Using the distance mask works pretty well, but it only seems to go from totally in focus at the camera and slowly blurs as you go deeper. With true (camera) DOF you can focus on an object deeper into the image. So things close to the lens are blurred, things in the midground are in focus and things in the background are blurred. Is it possible with the Object Mask method to do this?

Attached Link: DOF examples.

WOW that's great I missed that thread! Thank you a LOT! LSD!!! and thank you also to AS for the other thread :)

Aye, you can isolate any object you want using Object Mask rendering, Drawbridge. This method is, in fact, the same method that Bryce uses when calculating it's internal DOF. You simply mix the Distance Mask and the Object mask as layers in Photoshop. You can do this by Multiplying or Screening your Object render against your Distance render. If you need more clarity from your Distance render, then you simply adjust the levels, or use Autocontrast. All of this in, like I said, 1/1000th the time that it takes Bryce. So, to answer your question, Yes. You can do it easier, faster, and with cleaner results in postwork. Try this technique on your above scene, you will find it much cleaner and more realistic. Or is your above scene actually a photo (grins!)??? And my last point : you cannot realistially animate Brycean DOF. You cannot even change the DOF over a timeline, or tween it, or keyframe it. You can do all of this with postwork animation, in After Effects, easily, and still have countless hours less downtime than if you sit around waiting for Bryce to clean up it's inherent graininess. Just because you CAN use an internal option doesn't mean you should... And in the time it takes you to render one such monstrosity, you could be on to your next scene and be rendering other things...

Once my coffee takes full affect I think I may understand that. ;-) Actually it does make sense. I'll give it a go. And the above picture was a photo! :-) thanks

It's a combination of inverted distance mask and inverted object mask used as a filter mask in Photoshop. It's not perfect, most probably because the objects are small, so the distance mask doesn't have a big range as it would have if it were big. And the colours on the blurred objects are off. But, it's a start. :-)

BTW, for an even better of example of selective focus, take a look at this photo in my gallery. ;-)

Can I pick out two things to remain in focus then? (using the quick method - which I didn't fully understand.) What is "render a distance mask"? And how do you do it? And is it better done in PhotoShop or PaintShop? Oh, and what's Object Mask? And how do you do that too?

1. Yes. Just select both. Ctrl+Shift+click on each. Appliable both to groups and individual models/primitives/meshes. 2) Sometimes called Z-buffer, IINW, it shows objects in varying shades of grey according to the distance from camera. IE from the viewport. Little triangle beside the Render buttons, and just select Distance Mask. 3) Whatever floats your ... pic. :-) All of us who talked apparently have Photoshop. Never tried Paintshop, but I believe it can be as easily done there. 4) Object Mask shows in white just the selected item(s) and rest of the pic is black. You can find it in the same place where you can find the Distance Mask.

Attached Link: http://art.aprilgem.com/bryce/bryce11.html

Oh, and if you want just the lighter parts of the image to be blurred, you can select just the light parts of an image (Ctrl-Alt-Shift-~ on PC or Cmd-Option-Shift-~ on Mac), copy to a new layer (Ctrl/Cmd-J), blur, and set the layer to screen (or something). Of course, adjust this recipe to taste.

I'm afraid you're right - it doesn't make any sense to me. I don't recognise the program you're working in. It's probably PhotoShop in that case, as I've very rarely used it. So I wouldn't know how to even begin. Thanks for trying though. Sorry Erlik, same applies to what you said - it just went whooosh! Right over my head.

Attached Link: http://www.daz3d.com/support/tutorial/index.php?id=891

Erlik, No, I meant the Postwork method, but thanks. I may have to take days after all... Trouble is my brother pays the electricity bill and if he found out, (and he will!) he'd hit the roof, so I wanted to do the postwork method.

Been a long time since I've had calculus, so I don't understand most of the above, lol.
I have, however, used the DOF in Bryce quite a bit. Here are a few observations.
I use DOF with a rpp of 64, which gives good results IMHO. The results depend on how large your objects and scene are, and the camera settings (angle of the lens for instance).
My main gripe: the lens setting for DOF will only go down to .01. Does 5.5 have the ability to enter lower lens settings, like .001 for instance. This would allow greater control, most of what people don't like about Bryce's DOF, I think, is that even on the lowest setting, it is (depending on the effect desired) too strong. The only time I use DOF anyway is when I want the image to focus on a small part of the image. If the image is a landscape, there's no real reason for DOF to me. But if the image is an object or several objects on a tabletop surface, DOF can add a little realism, sort of like an adjustable focus on a real-world camera. Your taste may vary. :^)
Just my 2 cents.

Message edited on: 05/11/2005 14:24

This scene is already taking longer than I like - much longer and I'll forget what I was going to do... I have an object that I want to make the focus of a scene even though it will not be... centre stage so to speak. Actually I MAY want to have two objects sharp. Or I may not... (still thinking about that)

I have some stuff to do and will be posting the tutorial in an hour or even less.

Oh goody! Thanks

AprilGem, it makes perfect sense to me! And was very well-illustrated... Thank you M'lady... A good thread, don't get too frustrated Fran, it will all make perfect sense to you soon enough. We're just inundating you with new Bryce stuff, but don't worry!

I always had excellent results at 64 rpp with DOF in bryce 5. No grain issues, that I was aware of. Mind you, I never drove it beyond a slight effect - usually between .01 and a max of .05.

Aye, but try the same scene in Photoshop with the above-mentioned methods, and compare them. You'll find the postwork options MUCH more realistic and accurate. Also, Bryce only allows ONE type of blurring for DOF. With Photoshop (or PSP, I'm using PS just for my example) you can use hundreds of different DOF filters. KPT Equalizer, Gaussian, Flaming Pear Melancholytron, or ANY filter you want. You can even use this technique for non-DOF related filtering, such as motion blur and whatnot... Not to mention lighting techniques. Couple that with the VAST time differences, and you're back to our original result : DOF in Bryce is a waste.

Thank you, I found this and Erlik's very useful to work with. I'm already doing something a little like this to get DOF effect on my images but I'd say I'm still using it like a sledgehammer to crack a nut as I am only using the brightness and control to alter the mask. This might help me actually get a grip on curves enough to start learning that whole area. Never seen anyone talk about curves without having to write a whole book on it before :)

LSD, Oh I LIKE having lots of Bryce stuff thrown at me, (carefully wiping face) after all I did ask.

If it's for specific things I find I learn things better if I can actually try them out, rather than just hearing about part of a method in the middle of a conversation about something else, which can be intriguing but frustrating.

It's just that this particular image seems to be a really awkward one, everytime I think, "this is it, this render will be the last" I notice something really bad that I simply must fiddle with, so that instead of being finished days ago, I still have things to fix with each time taking another half day's fiddling - and when it's finally finished, I just bet it'll turn out not to have been worth the bother. It won't say what I wanted it to say, it just won't convey the impression I saw in my head in the beginning.

Tiresome really...

Message edited on: 05/12/2005 04:57

Aye, do you know what plop-rendering is, Fran? It can save you loads of time, if you plop-render just certain problem areas instead of re-running a full render.

Yes, I use it all the time, for small details. But the problems I've been having lately are when I've used terrains to create mist, I find that the edges of the terrains show odd downward streaks, so I'm quite glad to think (hopefully not mistakenly) that the PhotoShop DOF technique will give me the right focus on my main object without trying for days to make good mists - only to end up with funny streaks when I though I'd finally cracked it! (sigh)

Aye, perhaps you'll give us a screenshot? We might be able to help you better that way.

Fran said ""this is it, this render will be the last" I notice something really bad that I simply must fiddle with, so that instead of being finished days ago,"- Boy do I know that feeling with my current image! I did an overnight render thinking 'ok, this is it, three weeks working on it and this should be the one I finally run with.' But no, I can still see things to tweak. I'm beginning to wonder if there are always going to be things about some image that look like they need improving. Or maybe I've just hit a perfectionist stage.

"Art is never finished, merely forgotten..."

Um, forget the mist streaks - fixed them myself. Had a snooze in front of the TV and when I woke up I thought to myself - "I'll just try that out". I did, & it worked!