Warp wrote:

> :>   Secondly: With progressive render you can't use antialiasing.
> : You're obviously more informed than I, but must this be true?
>   Ok, it's not true. You can use antialiasing, but only for every pixel.
> That is, your image will get (by default) 9 times slower to render. That is,
> if your scene renders in 1 hour without antialiasing, it will take
> approximately 9 hours with antialiasing.
> : AA happens by comparing pixel colors to those around it. If there is too much
> : difference, it sends out new pixels, right?
>   Yes, but if there are no nearby pixels, how can you know if the current
> pixel has to be antialiased or not?

Okay, this is probably like a caveman who's used a phaser a week arguing with the
Starfleet engineer who designed it, but here goes:

Bryce renders aren't  THAT slow, are they, and the image that evolves on the screen
suggests that the anti-aliasing that occurs only happens at the very end.  This
scenario of "no nearby pixels" would be a bigger problem if the AA occurred line by
line rather than at "the end".  I just cannot see how it takes more time, you've got
to do the comparison sometime, right?


>   Also continuing an interrupted render may cause problems with this kind
> of progressive rendering.

That's actually something I've never even considered doing.

Post a reply to this message