Lol, you're pretty good at comparisons. Also, i see your gifs everywhere on the internet.
A comparison of motion blur implementations *spawn
- Thread starter ultragpu
- Start date
Lol, you're pretty good at comparisons. Also, i see your gifs everywhere on the internet.
L. Scofield
Veteran
It's both a gift and a curse.
Now he looks pasted in. Motion blur has improved since then but that's not saying much since at E3 it looked completely atrocious.To get back on topic:
E3
Trailer 2016
The things i notice:
- Tweaked AO (Sams hand)
- Tweaked or changed dof (Sam out of focus)
- Tweaked lighting or sss (hair/skin)
- Less AA artifacts
- Less mud (probably because they just load the scene instead of playing the demo, side effect of real-time cutscenes
)
- More accurate moblur (look at brick wall/plants)
Maybe for a last gen game, but then again KZ2 and the Crytek games happened so not really.
@ L.Scofield
Taking your sweet time frame freeze the entire sequence and going through them one by one are we? Yeah there's no way 99% of players could catch any of those artifacts in motion. Oh and I'm sure some last gen games do a few things better here and there but what's the point in such comparison when you're not looking at the big picture? What's funny is I don't see you ever praise The Order's motion blur since it's arguably one of the best implementation if you're so inclined to judge a game's visual prowess based on such post processing technique, but then again we all know why.
Taking your sweet time frame freeze the entire sequence and going through them one by one are we
? Yeah there's no way 99% of players could catch any of those artifacts in motion. Oh and I'm sure some last gen games do a few things better here and there but what's the point in such comparison when you're not looking at the big picture? What's funny is I don't see you ever praise The Order's motion blur since it's arguably one of the best implementation if you're so inclined to judge a game's visual prowess based on such post processing technique, but then again we all know why.http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/articles//a/1/7/9/3/0/9/5/b.bmp.jpg/EG11/resize/1920x-1 : high quality motion blur according to DF. However, on Xbox One the motion blur is disabled on any demanding scene.
Do someone have an example of a high quality and consistent motion blur on console ?
Do someone have an example of a high quality and consistent motion blur on console ?
Ah, nice. Now i can post some examples without going off-topic.
Bloodborne is using a per-object only moblur and doesn't blur the image when you are moving the camera:
Both Driveclub and The Order: 1886 are using high quality (many samples) per object + camera moblur
Bloodborne is using a per-object only moblur and doesn't blur the image when you are moving the camera:
Both Driveclub and The Order: 1886 are using high quality (many samples) per object + camera moblur
I'll repeat what I have been saying about OMB in SFV, it's not good
It blurs a large portion of the model rather than just the part that is moving fast, it also catches even the slightest of the movement so even small or slow movements result in OMB being applied. Case in point look at Ryu in the image posted on last page, his chest and face are blurred when all he is doing is making his usual pose before the fight starts where he moves his arms. Just because you can do OMB doesn't mean every single movement should have it, there should be a set limit for the speed of the object crossing which OMB should be applied in a subtle manner.
Motion Blur when done right is a good thing, especially object motion blur, I don't really like camera motion blur all that much unless it's done in a style where it's only applied sparsely. In most cases though they either lack enough samples or have too much intensity or get applied even on slow moving body parts (SFV).
It blurs a large portion of the model rather than just the part that is moving fast, it also catches even the slightest of the movement so even small or slow movements result in OMB being applied. Case in point look at Ryu in the image posted on last page, his chest and face are blurred when all he is doing is making his usual pose before the fight starts where he moves his arms. Just because you can do OMB doesn't mean every single movement should have it, there should be a set limit for the speed of the object crossing which OMB should be applied in a subtle manner.
Motion Blur when done right is a good thing, especially object motion blur, I don't really like camera motion blur all that much unless it's done in a style where it's only applied sparsely. In most cases though they either lack enough samples or have too much intensity or get applied even on slow moving body parts (SFV).
I think it's the Object motion blur that gets disabled on Xbone when it has a demanding scene. Or maybe it turns off both object and camera.
L. Scofield
Veteran
So in other words: "LEAVE UNCHARTED ALONE!! WAHHH"@ L.Scofield
Taking your sweet time frame freeze the entire sequence and going through them one by one are we
As for TO1886, it's implementation isn't better than what others have done. The one thing that sticks out about it is that there's no minimum threshold of motion needed for the MB to kick in so even the slightest of movements blur the image. Personally, I don't like that but then again it's one of those "we're mimicking a shitty camera" cases so I'm sure some people do.
I'm not seeing any motion blur there. Full camera motion blur is easy by just accumulating with the previous frame(s). Think the drunk/drugged scene from Uncharted 3
L. Scofield
Veteran
Looks like per-object ghosting.
U3 was released with a but that turned OBMB off, despite the engine suporting it, that was later patched. And you can´t get full camera motion blur by just accumulating with the previous frame, that blurs way more than what you want out of a typical camera MB, and it creates noticeble banding even at 60fps. The effect is used often though, but to convey dizzyness or some such, and implementations date as far back as the n64 and psone. It looks nothing like traditional camera MB though.
At typical game framerates that just looks like ghosting. The time deltas are too large and not enough samples.
If you use much smaller durations between rendering each frame, so that the discrete frames can blur together into decent motion trails, you get motion blur. But "camera motion blur" is probably a mischaracterization, since it accurately deals with all movement, although it certainly accounts for camera movement.
What is good or bad motion blur? I admit that my opinion is very personal and subjective but I think could be representative of a lot of gamers, notably those who have left consoles for PC gaming.
First the moblur needs to be very light at low velocity and in the same time use high samples in order to keep some sharpness, i.e. high frequency information in it. But the most important aspect for me is that it MUST be very light a low velocity, the quality of motion blur is secondary.
There are 2 kinds of motion blur, full screen motion blur and per-object motion blur. Those have 2 very different effects and unfortunately I often see "tests" about motion blur "see how motion blur is a good thing!" only using the per-object motion blur kind (and at a super high quality never seen in games) with a empty background which is not representative of full screen motion blur and not even representative of per-object motion blur used in a game using detailed backgrounds.
My main complaint and object of this post is about full screen motion blur, particularly the worst of all: full screen velocity based motion blur.
A good implementation in a 30fps game is used in Far Cry 4, the implementation is not even that good per se, but most importantly the effect is used sparingly:
Far Cry 4:
Still image http://i.imgur.com/U4eOak0.png
Low velocity http://i.imgur.com/B99Sm0t.png (not much of a difference from previous image)
moderate velocity http://i.imgur.com/ZhMr3t9.png
Fastest velocity http://i.imgur.com/Q1TIPxC.png
The one used in Driveclub and Battlefront is OK too, even if a bit too high: there is still a lot of information of the original image in it, so our brain can still perceive some clarity even in motion, which is good and Battlefront is a 60fps game, so it helps a lot:
Battlefront:
http://36646d87786feafc0611-0338bbb...54.r0.cf1.rackcdn.com/images/oc01b7qXSiu6.png
Driveclub:
Still http://i.imgur.com/w7mKd0D.png
Low velocity (I do a U-turn here) http://i.imgur.com/2uWdqEk.png could be better but hopefully you rarely do U-turns in DC.
High velocity on a bend, there is still sharpness somehow in it: http://i.imgur.com/fPrFtLJ.png
Again, the motion blur needs to be very light when you turn slowly the camera which is not the case for Dying light, it's way too heavy even at low velocity even if the motion blur in Dying light is using a very high number of samples. It helps but still the effect is too much.
You have games that have both low quality moblur and are heavy at low velocity like Batman Arkham Night or Shadows of Mordor. Those are the worst notably at 30fps. Notice how Batman is already blurred even slowly moving the camera.
Batman:
Batman still http://i.imgur.com/YfCzCq7.png
Batman low velocity http://i.imgur.com/rVG6Bq5.png Ugh
Yes @Clukos Bloodborne has a reasonable use of Moblur. It does in fact have full screen motion blur but it's rather light and only noticeable at high velocity.
Bloodborne:
Unmoving: http://i.imgur.com/qxd3ArM.png
Low / moderate velocity, not a big difference and helped by the CA that blurs the original pixels IMO, I talk about this later in this post. http://i.imgur.com/ggHHZ4v.png
Bloodborne max velocity with camera at max speed, there is still information in the image: http://i.imgur.com/md45B3R.png
MGS5 motion blur is super low quality (both per-object and full screen), full screen just blurs the image for the sake of blurring it and per-object create visible artifacts noticeable even in a compressed youtube video. Terrible stuff. But at least it's a 60fps game so you still get a lot of information in motion, so that's tolerable-ish. BTW there wasn't any motion blur ASAIK in Ground zeroes, I don't remember people complaining about it.
MGS5:
Average full screen motion blur, few details left: http://abload.de/img/metalgearsolidvthephaeasal.jpg
Terrible per-object MB + average full screen MB: http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/ar.../8/PS4_003.bmp.jpg/EG11/quality/90/format/jpg
I get that motion blur is used in order to kill the judder but the problem is that it often destroys too much the image in the process, there is a fragile balance that is achieved by some games (like Far Cry 4, Bloodborne is OK, Driveclub a bit heavy but it's a driving game so you don't usually span the camera laterally). I think this fragile balance should be the target for developers, like SMAA 1X or Flipquad TAA are currently ones of the best post AA in the industry with a good balance: cheap, kill the jaggies enough and don't wreck too much the image.
I think heavy motion blur at low velocity is a very bad solution. Yes you'll remove some of the judder, but never all of it, and you'll certainly destroy the information forever. If you don't use any motion blur or less, yes there will be more judder, but at least you'll see all the pixels in the image and most brains have the ability to get rid of the judder, at least partially. After playing at 60fps, playing at 30fps is distracting and not great. But eventually most get used to 30fps again because I believe their brain in a way adapts and makes them ignore the judder maybe by "inventing" some missing frames in order to have the illusion of judder-free-ish motion.
But your brain never will be able to re-invent the billions of pixels destroyed in the process of heavy full screen motion blur. Nope.
Finally I think that there are others factor than pure clarity in motion that could influence me in how I perceive the phenomenon. I notice that the more games have details or are in higher resolutions, the more the motion blur is bugging me. So the more percentage of information the game loses in motion, the more it is noticeable comparatively and the more it's a disturbance (see Bloodborne part). Also input lag and even overall quality of the game could play a very small role in it too. In the end it's all about immersion for me. Clarity in motion plays an important role but there are numerous others factors that could participate in the process.
First the moblur needs to be very light at low velocity and in the same time use high samples in order to keep some sharpness, i.e. high frequency information in it. But the most important aspect for me is that it MUST be very light a low velocity, the quality of motion blur is secondary.
There are 2 kinds of motion blur, full screen motion blur and per-object motion blur. Those have 2 very different effects and unfortunately I often see "tests" about motion blur "see how motion blur is a good thing!" only using the per-object motion blur kind (and at a super high quality never seen in games) with a empty background which is not representative of full screen motion blur and not even representative of per-object motion blur used in a game using detailed backgrounds.
My main complaint and object of this post is about full screen motion blur, particularly the worst of all: full screen velocity based motion blur.
A good implementation in a 30fps game is used in Far Cry 4, the implementation is not even that good per se, but most importantly the effect is used sparingly:
Far Cry 4:
Still image http://i.imgur.com/U4eOak0.png
Low velocity http://i.imgur.com/B99Sm0t.png (not much of a difference from previous image)
moderate velocity http://i.imgur.com/ZhMr3t9.png
Fastest velocity http://i.imgur.com/Q1TIPxC.png
The one used in Driveclub and Battlefront is OK too, even if a bit too high: there is still a lot of information of the original image in it, so our brain can still perceive some clarity even in motion, which is good and Battlefront is a 60fps game, so it helps a lot:
Battlefront:
http://36646d87786feafc0611-0338bbb...54.r0.cf1.rackcdn.com/images/oc01b7qXSiu6.png
Driveclub:
Still http://i.imgur.com/w7mKd0D.png
Low velocity (I do a U-turn here) http://i.imgur.com/2uWdqEk.png could be better but hopefully you rarely do U-turns in DC.
High velocity on a bend, there is still sharpness somehow in it: http://i.imgur.com/fPrFtLJ.png
Again, the motion blur needs to be very light when you turn slowly the camera which is not the case for Dying light, it's way too heavy even at low velocity even if the motion blur in Dying light is using a very high number of samples. It helps but still the effect is too much.
You have games that have both low quality moblur and are heavy at low velocity like Batman Arkham Night or Shadows of Mordor. Those are the worst notably at 30fps. Notice how Batman is already blurred even slowly moving the camera.
Batman:
Batman still http://i.imgur.com/YfCzCq7.png
Batman low velocity http://i.imgur.com/rVG6Bq5.png Ugh
Yes @Clukos Bloodborne has a reasonable use of Moblur. It does in fact have full screen motion blur but it's rather light and only noticeable at high velocity.
Bloodborne:
Unmoving: http://i.imgur.com/qxd3ArM.png
Low / moderate velocity, not a big difference and helped by the CA that blurs the original pixels IMO, I talk about this later in this post. http://i.imgur.com/ggHHZ4v.png
Bloodborne max velocity with camera at max speed, there is still information in the image: http://i.imgur.com/md45B3R.png
MGS5 motion blur is super low quality (both per-object and full screen), full screen just blurs the image for the sake of blurring it and per-object create visible artifacts noticeable even in a compressed youtube video. Terrible stuff. But at least it's a 60fps game so you still get a lot of information in motion, so that's tolerable-ish. BTW there wasn't any motion blur ASAIK in Ground zeroes, I don't remember people complaining about it.
MGS5:
Average full screen motion blur, few details left: http://abload.de/img/metalgearsolidvthephaeasal.jpg
Terrible per-object MB + average full screen MB: http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/ar.../8/PS4_003.bmp.jpg/EG11/quality/90/format/jpg
I get that motion blur is used in order to kill the judder but the problem is that it often destroys too much the image in the process, there is a fragile balance that is achieved by some games (like Far Cry 4, Bloodborne is OK, Driveclub a bit heavy but it's a driving game so you don't usually span the camera laterally). I think this fragile balance should be the target for developers, like SMAA 1X or Flipquad TAA are currently ones of the best post AA in the industry with a good balance: cheap, kill the jaggies enough and don't wreck too much the image.
I think heavy motion blur at low velocity is a very bad solution. Yes you'll remove some of the judder, but never all of it, and you'll certainly destroy the information forever. If you don't use any motion blur or less, yes there will be more judder, but at least you'll see all the pixels in the image and most brains have the ability to get rid of the judder, at least partially. After playing at 60fps, playing at 30fps is distracting and not great. But eventually most get used to 30fps again because I believe their brain in a way adapts and makes them ignore the judder maybe by "inventing" some missing frames in order to have the illusion of judder-free-ish motion.
But your brain never will be able to re-invent the billions of pixels destroyed in the process of heavy full screen motion blur. Nope.
Finally I think that there are others factor than pure clarity in motion that could influence me in how I perceive the phenomenon. I notice that the more games have details or are in higher resolutions, the more the motion blur is bugging me. So the more percentage of information the game loses in motion, the more it is noticeable comparatively and the more it's a disturbance (see Bloodborne part). Also input lag and even overall quality of the game could play a very small role in it too. In the end it's all about immersion for me. Clarity in motion plays an important role but there are numerous others factors that could participate in the process.
Last edited:
Billy Idol
Legend
So which game has not only ok MB but very good MB than?
If we are talking about Object based then I liked the implementation in Resident Evil 5, only fast moving objects had motion blur applied to them, infact most MT Framework games had good motiob blur. As they were subtle and didn't get applied for even the smallest of the motion, it's subtle and high quality which is why RE5 is a very crisp and clean looking game for 7th gen standards.
For full screen, I don't know perhaps one of the Crysis games? Gears of War 3 had a decent implementation too.
For full screen, I don't know perhaps one of the Crysis games? Gears of War 3 had a decent implementation too.
Sorry, I meant game camera blur, not realistic simulated camera blur.
That's true. I'm just saying back then it was a common enough hack to create 'motion blur' by accumulating frames. eg. this at 7:30
Not really. They incorrectly try to reproduce what happens in cameras for various reason: nostalgia, shiny visual effect and also it's a way to partially get rid of judder but it has a big cost: most of the image information is destroyed in the process. The only place where motion blur happens is in our brain, in cameras and in videogames.They also try to reproduce what happens in real life :
I haven't seen a very good MB yet (but I am sure it could exist, we are only in the infancy of the MoBlur technology IMO). The best MoBlur I have seen is maybe in Driveclub for a 30fps game, because it's is cleanly and smartly applied. Maybe Battlefront for a 60fps game but I have heard COD BLOPS3 has a very good implementation for a 60fps game, maybe I should try this one.
But for a stable 60fps game, the best MB is definitely the lack of moblur IMO. :smile2:
Our eyes also blur the images we process, the easiest way to test that is waving your hand in front of your face like an idiot (or... John Cena?). You lose all that information no matter how hard you try to capture it and cameras are actually much better at filtering out motion blur at very low shutter speed (they effectively handle changes in light much faster than our eyes can).
Some examples
Some examples
Similar threads
- Locked
