Dumb question about Pixel Spread

This is one of those questions I feel like I should know the answer to, but anyway.

How heavy is Pixel Spread, processor wise? I’m trying to speed up this comp a bit and it already has too much Dof and defocus going on and I’m about to turn on the motion blur. Someone told me years ago Pixel Spread was a proc hog but I wanted to get a quick second opinion.

I’ve never particularly seen a slowdown. But if you do, there are also some matchboxes that might be faster.

1 Like

I am regularly jumping on and off iMac machines. Pixel spread is a little heavy on setups.

2 Likes

Compared to DoF, the Pixelspread is def. peanuts to the processingspeed. So there should also a way improving the time with another defocus node/workflow, even if all types kinda need some heavy ressources.

1 Like

As an aside, I can’t remember the exact name, but there is a SFX Pixel Spread (matchbox) that you can use in Action (or Batch I guess), that uses a Strength input – so the effect of the Pixel Spread will be wider or narrower based on the alpha or gmask input.

1 Like

Use Resize to make your own region of interest. And the time pixel spread saves you is likely more important than any hit in rendering.

4 Likes

Oh that’s interesting, I’ll try and hunt that down.

I went and swapped out a few of the Dof nodes with some y_lensblur and a couple of crok_defocus and the comp got much more workable.

Thanks all!

1 Like

I agree with PlaceYourBetts… PixelSpread is one of the heavier nodes in Flame.

2 Likes

If you are using Interpolate mode in Pixel Spread, try the matchbox called In-Fill Blur. It does the same thing and uses GPU.

2 Likes

Yes, slows me down when I use it… but usually worth the trade off.

1 Like