"Gilles Tran" <gitran_nospam_@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
news:421bab2d@news.povray.org...

> kurtzlepirate-571F88.16540520022005@news.povray.org...
>
> > any one can explain ?
>
> A demonstration of the problem :
>
> Antialiasing in 3.5
> http://www.oyonale.com/temp/glass_demo_35.png
>
> Antialiasing in 3.6
> http://www.oyonale.com/temp/glass_demo_36.png
>
> These images are rendered in regular POV-Ray using the same code. The
> lighting in the 3.6 version is much better due to the new unclipped
> radiosity values, and the sparkling on the glass is more realistic. However,
> the antialiasing around the bright pixels is just awful compared to the one
> in the 3.5 version.

yes but, if I understand Warp correctly, it shouldn't be a problem to only do
pre-clipping with standard anti-aliasing.  I believe everybody agrees that
unclipped colors give better and more realistic results with radiosity (you just
gave an excellent example) and with focal-blur (I made an example once:
http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/thread/%3C41d9ed03%40news.povray.o
rg%3E/?ttop=208966&toff=150), but I agree with Warp that with standard
anti-aliasing it causes more problems than it solves.  I don't believe going
back to pre-clipping is the right solution, but maybe color-bleeding is too
difficult to do.

cu!
--
camera{location-z*3}#macro G(b,e)b+(e-b)*(C/50)#end#macro L(b,e,k,l)#local C=0
;#while(C<50)sphere{G(b,e),.1pigment{rgb G(k,l)}finish{ambient 1}}#local C=C+1
;#end#end L(y-x,y,x,x+y)L(y,-x-y,x+y,y)L(-x-y,-y,y,y+z)L(-y,y,y+z,x+y)L(0,x+y,
<.5,1,.5>,x)L(0,x-y,<.5,1,.5>,x)               // ZK http://www.povplace.be.tf

Post a reply to this message