Am 13.01.2011 14:23, schrieb Jaime Vives Piqueres:

> Anyhow, I still don't get it: you would think that taking more samples
> will be slow, but always better to reduce artifacts and get more
> quality, isn't?

The problem with "always_sample on" is that those additional samples 
will be taken into account only for /some/ pixels (namely those pixels 
that are computed after the respective sample is taken); so you get 
areas that are more accurate than others, with hard boundaries between 
them (render blocks for instance). That typically looks worse than 
sticking with the less accurate result. (Unless the increase in accuracy 
is extremely minor, but in that rare case there's obviously no point in 
taking those additional samples anyway.)

Post a reply to this message