nanoDLP

I believe it is a type of Binary logic or Boolean Logic, it's pretty easy to implement in most programming languages. You can even do this with Excel in the formula box.

EDIT:
@TIMBOLOGIST it's possible to do what you want manually, but would be a real pain to make it automated, especially if you want it to be "content aware".

Let's say you want to have three different layer heights for a soldier model.
100u layer height for all layers below his tool belt
20u layer for his tool belt and gun
50u for chest
20u for head

you would need to slice the model 3 times, convert to PNGs, pull just the layers you need to a new folder, zip them, upload them, create a formula for dynamic cure time to accommodate for what layer is at layer height, create a formula for dynamic lift and lower.
this would always need to be changed for every model.

@Shahin, I think it may actually be possible to automate the slicing if you nest the images in to named folders

Folder - Plate 1
-------------------Folder -20
--------------------------------------1.png
--------------------------------------2.png
-------------------------------------- ....
-------------------Folder -50
--------------------------------------1.png
--------------------------------------2.png
-------------------------------------- ...
-------------------Folder -100
--------------------------------------1.png
--------------------------------------2.png
-------------------------------------- ...

Then add a field  "Dynamic Layer Height" which is a comma separated list of micron sizes and some new variables for setting and getting in formulas

[[SetDynamicHeight 20]] to set it, and [[DynamicHeight]] to check it

then be used like this for cure time

{(
([[DynamicHeight]]==20)*5+([[DynamicHeight]]==50)*7+([[DynamicHeight]]==100)*9
)}

and for setting Dynamic Layer Height in Before Each Layer field

{(
(([[LayerNumber]]<=100)*[[SetDynamicHeight 100]])+(([[LayerNumber]]>=101)*[[SetDynamicHeight 50]]*([[LayerNumber<250))+(([[LayerNumber]]>=251)*[[SetDynamicHeight 20]])
)}

of course, whenever you set the new DynamicHeight it adjusts the [[LayerPosition]].

you can try using this template, substituting your own values for the place holders. This should be a fair starting point and replicates a similar function to how Kudo3Ds determines cure time by layer height.

{(
(([[LayerNumber]]<=21)*Burn_in_Cure_Time)+
(([[LayerNumber]]>=22)*Support_Cure_Time*([[LayerNumber]]<=35))+
(([[LayerNumber]]>=36)*Detail_Point_Cure_Time*([[LayerNumber]]<=40))+
(([[LayerNumber]]>=41)*Layer_Cure_Time)
)}

if you want to use a formula for calculating who long you should cure based on area you'll need to do some experimentation.

first check to see how long it takes to cure a small area (5 mm x 5 mm for example) then check to see how long it takes to cure a much larger area ( 15 x 15, maybe).
if you can provide me with observed cure times and size of cured slices I can whip up a formula for you like I showed above.

what are you going to base splits on? layer position, current height, LargestArea, SmallestArea, something else?

I can write out a couple of templates if you give me an idea of how you want it broken up.

we may have an alternative to a time based mask. Shahin, is it possible to have models loaded in with supports, and then just the support structures? this way we get stronger supports while keeping detail of the model.
look at it like this timeline:

Layer 1 - exposes both support structure and model
Layer 2 - exposes just support structure
cycle z axis
Layer 3 - exposes both support structure and model
Layer 4 - exposes just support structure
cycle z axis

as far as I know, no system I've ever heard of implements that for SLA, however it is pretty similar to how FDM printers handle multiple materials.

It's less dynamic than going completely on surface area, but at least it ensures sturdy supports.

name the slices with prefix to differentiate them ie model-1.png, support-1.png, or seperate them into 2 folders, create some logic that only requires you to display support slices if they exist.

I've taken to using a slightly better solution. the B9 Creator Software has a useful Hatching pattern support base.

new workflow is

1.) Import into Blender to smooth model (Optional)
2.) import into to Netfab Basic or Print Studio to repair model. Not sure which is better at this point, and most models don't need it.
3.) import into meshmixer to optimize orientation
4.) import into B9 Creator Software for support and foundation. (the support doesn't branch, similar to Creation Workshop supports)
5.) Import into Asiga Stomp for slicing
6.) import into NanoDLP
7.) Print.

Let me know how your results turn out, I'm happy someone else was able to get some use from my research.