 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
in a rendering (better than the povray's default "AA 0.3") Thanks...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
_Light_Beam_ wrote:
>
> in a rendering (better than the povray's default "AA 0.3") Thanks...
+a0.0 +am2 +r10 should be pretty good.
See you in a few years then... ;-)
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 28 Feb. 2003 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> +a0.0 +am2 +r10 should be pretty good.
>
> See you in a few years then... ;-)
>
> Christoph
Perhaps not... If I use Pixar's renderfarm...
So, thank you...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> +a0.0 +am2 +r10 should be pretty good.
It's just taken me ten minutes to work out what that does... (AA threshold =
0 = always supersample, method = 2, depth = 10, i.e., 100 rays per pixel.)
There are some people out there with very impressive powers of recall!
(From someone who has now MEMORISED the zillion-digit product key for my
copy of Windows 2000 Advanced Server... what does that tell you???)
> See you in a few years then... ;-)
Depends on what you wanna render doesn't it? ;-)
Andrew.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003, Andrew Coppin wrote:
>> +a0.0 +am2 +r10 should be pretty good.
>
>It's just taken me ten minutes to work out what that does... (AA threshold =
>0 = always supersample, method = 2, depth = 10, i.e., 100 rays per pixel.)
>There are some people out there with very impressive powers of recall!
is that a gaussian function that is applied to calculate the anti-aliased
value of the pixel or simply the average of pixels within a 10 pixel radius.
Then again, are we talking a square of 10x10 and not a radius of 10 pixels?
>
>(From someone who has now MEMORISED the zillion-digit product key for my
>copy of Windows 2000 Advanced Server... what does that tell you???)
I could once spout out the first 100 digits of pi. At parties and such. I
seem to remember spending a lot of time talking to plants in dark corners
but then again, I am a Barclay ( see StarTrek ) clone. :)
>
>> See you in a few years then... ;-)
>
>Depends on what you wanna render doesn't it? ;-)
>
>Andrew.
Well .. I am gonna give it a try on a 10240x7680 pixel image. Should take a
week or so and a gig of RAM.
Dennis
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmx de> wrote:
> +a0.0 +am2 +r10 should be pretty good.
"+a0.0 +am2" should be enough for most difficult cases. If it's a very
difficult case, then add "+r4".
--
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <Pine.GSO.4.53.0304221425230.5704@blastwave>,
Dennis Clarke <dcl### [at] blastwaveorg> wrote:
> is that a gaussian function that is applied to calculate the anti-aliased
> value of the pixel or simply the average of pixels within a 10 pixel radius.
> Then again, are we talking a square of 10x10 and not a radius of 10 pixels?
This is antialiasing, not blur. We are supersampling a single pixel.
--
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3ea597e7@news.povray.org>, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg>
wrote:
> Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde> wrote:
> > +a0.0 +am2 +r10 should be pretty good.
>
> "+a0.0 +am2" should be enough for most difficult cases. If it's a very
> difficult case, then add "+r4".
What is the point of using method 2 with a threshold of 0.0? You might
as well use non-adaptive antialiasing...these settings get rid of the
calculation savings of the adaptive method. This should be about the
same as rendering an oversized image without antialiasing and then
resizing it down. (in a decent graphics program, of course)
--
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> What is the point of using method 2 with a threshold of 0.0?
Hmm... why didn't *I* notice that? 8-|
Andrew.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christopher James Huff wrote:
>
> What is the point of using method 2 with a threshold of 0.0? You might
> as well use non-adaptive antialiasing...these settings get rid of the
> calculation savings of the adaptive method. This should be about the
> same as rendering an oversized image without antialiasing and then
> resizing it down. (in a decent graphics program, of course)
If you scale down a larger render you can additionally reduce aliasing
artefacts by applying blurring filters before the scaling.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 28 Feb. 2003 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
