 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
de news: 4093cc9f@news.povray.org...
> Rafal 'Raf256' Maj wrote:
> Yes, and I said that you can achieve the same easier and even more
> efficiently by just using stronger AA. There is no need for
> enlarging+resizing to get rid of Aliasing.
>
Doesn't AA make the same thing?
computing more points just as if image size was bigger and interpolating
them just as an image editor when you reduce resolution?
Marc
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
jac### [at] wanadoo fr news:4093e81c$1@news.povray.org
> computing more points just as if image size was bigger and interpolating
> them just as an image editor when you reduce resolution?
AA tries to do it in smart way (compute as mych extra rays - supersamples
per one final pixel as needed for this pixel), but sometimes this adaptive
method gives wrong results, therefore using it *and* double resoulution is
the fastest way to get rid of heavy aliasing.
--
http://www.raf256.com/3d/
Rafal Maj 'Raf256', home page - http://www.raf256.com/me/
Computer Graphics
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> AA tries to do it in smart way (compute as mych extra rays - supersamples
> per one final pixel as needed for this pixel), but sometimes this adaptive
> method gives wrong results, therefore using it *and* double resoulution is
> the fastest way to get rid of heavy aliasing.
What do you mean by "wrong results"? Could you please post a simple example
scene (and AA settings) where AA gives those wrong results? I'd be very
interest to see it.
Severi S.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
sev### [at] NOT_THISsibafi news:40940aaf$1@news.povray.org
> What do you mean by "wrong results"? Could you please post a simple
> example scene (and AA settings) where AA gives those wrong results?
> I'd be very interest to see it.
Hmm it seems that +am2 works exacly as resizing, *but* this behaviour is
not as it is described in docs. (+am2 results in non-adaptive antialiasing,
always maximum number of supersamples are used even if we are rendering an
empty black scene)
--
http://www.raf256.com/3d/
Rafal Maj 'Raf256', home page - http://www.raf256.com/me/
Computer Graphics
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Hmm it seems that +am2 works exacly as resizing, *but* this behaviour is
> not as it is described in docs. (+am2 results in non-adaptive
antialiasing,
> always maximum number of supersamples are used even if we are rendering an
> empty black scene)
I think it does follow the docs description - if not, you should maybe
report this at p.d.i. You can't see the adaptation with +a0.0 as all
subsamples are calculated - as written in docs. With non-zero threshold the
adaptation kicks in. I think that is correct functioning. If I misunderstood
your point, please corect me.
Severi S.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
