 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> That is correct, the limitation that focal blur and AA cannot be
> combined has been removed from POV-Ray 3.7 :-)
Nice :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> That is correct, the limitation that focal blur and AA cannot be combined
> has been removed from POV-Ray 3.7 :-)
Cool! So does that mean that if you have AA enabled, it will always send the
rays through the sample point of the image plane, but if you don't, it will
send the rays through a random point in the pixel on the image plane, as in
3.6? Or with AA disabled, will it now send the rays through the center of
the pixel?
It would be great if this were coupled with the ability to clip before
anti-aliasing, so that you could clip after focal blur but before AA,
creating well-anti-aliased bright blurs of light. =)
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I've found that the wineglass.pov file might at first appear to render okay
in the regular executable but I noticed it doesn't have the parts of the
glass the way they should be. Apparently the QCone_Y, being a quadric, isn't
able to be used right in the CSG intersection. In fact, while I made changes
to the top of the glass it somehow affected the bottom, completely different
declares. Very odd thing.
To see the glass parts you might want to change the glass texture to be
opaque. I replaced that with pigment { rgb 1 }.
Bob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Another problem but also a bit of answer about the sunsethf.pov not
rendering. It's the waves normal. Discovered this reason when trying to find
out why mist.pov wasn't rendering either, it uses the ripples normal.
Bob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trf de> wrote in message
news:428e1d29$1@news.povray.org...
> Bob Hughes wrote:
>> Something else... I gave AA a try on the chess2 render and it slowed by
>> over 5 times and message window shows AA being used instead of ignored
>> due to focal blur being used.
>
> That is correct, the limitation that focal blur and AA cannot be combined
> has been removed from POV-Ray 3.7 :-)
Thanks Thorsten. News to me, too.
Now that I've checked on it more, by rendering the file focalblur.pov in
scenes\camera, at first I thought that the AA was being done in a unique
way. Which, perhaps it is. It's like it affects the blurring regions
inversely and exponentially. Then I realized it might need more 'depth' or
larger AA sampling array, so I used +r5 and that cleaned up the out-of-focus
parts great.
For example, if +a0.1 is used alone it looks disasterous, almost like a
defective AA. Increase the ray depth and it seems able to encompass the
blur.
Better yet, AA method 2 is superb for this. I tried +a0.3 +r1 +am2 and
improved the non-AA rendering without a slowdown. In fact, I'd suggest
everyone not even use method 1.
Bob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bob Hughes <bob### [at] charternet> wrote:
> Better yet, AA method 2 is superb for this. I tried +a0.3 +r1 +am2 and
> improved the non-AA rendering without a slowdown. In fact, I'd suggest
> everyone not even use method 1.
Perhaps method 2 should be made the default when using focal blur?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> For example, if +a0.1 is used alone it looks disasterous, almost like a
> defective AA. Increase the ray depth and it seems able to encompass the
> blur.
Isn't there an AA bug for method 1 in the current beta? Or was that fixed?
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Slime <fak### [at] emailaddress> wrote:
> Isn't there an AA bug for method 1 in the current beta? Or was that fixed?
It seems to still be there. It might indeed be the reason why he is
getting an awful result in that focal blur scene.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
