On 27-4-2017 10:07, Stephen wrote:
> On 4/27/2017 7:59 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 27-4-2017 0:29, Stephen wrote:
>
>>
>> Only +am3 sets stochastic rendering. I like it but it is much slower imo
>> when set to high quality like +ac99. However, I may be wrong as I have
>> not compared renders seriously. Clipka would know ;-) I little bit of
>> grainy image is not a problem to me although it is difficult to balance
>> quality versus (acceptable) render time. I am not always that patient.
>>
>
> That is the crux of the matter. How long you are willing to wait for the
> quality you want.

Indeed. I am running a render now with slightly increased quality 
(+ac0.95 +r4) which is already more satisfactory. 80% done after 3h23'.

>
>
>> With Dhalgren, I used +am2, so no stochastic rendering there.
>>
>
> But I did a couple of runs with +am3 as it was the first time I had used
> UberPov.

I am a fan. :-)

>
>>>
>>> I am an egg. :-)
>>> Albeit a thousand-year-old egg. Yum yum.
>>>
>>
>> Hum... I am a bit reluctant to have a bite :-)
>>
>
> They are really nice. They are a bit like haggis, in the way the taste
> is linked to the way you catch them. ;-)
>

Really? Well, I shall have to taste haggis too then. ;-)

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message