Harry Bardak
TD / Compositor.
Http://perso.wanadoo.fr/harry.bardak/
+33 6 76 63 35 54
+44 781 661 4147
----------------------------------------
> From: eric(at)dzignlight.com
> To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
> Subject: Re: combating heavy aliasing artifacts
> Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 12:56:49 -0400
>
>
> I'm pretty pleased with the non-aliased results I've been getting
> from the rasterizer over the past few hours.
> At one point I even knew what the rasterizer did, back when it was
> called rapid-motion. I seem to remember certain situations where
> artifacts would show up, but now I don't remember why. Is there
> anything written down anywhere about when using rasterizer is a *bad*
> idea?
>
> -Eric
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "kim aldis" <kim(at)aldis.org.uk>
> To: <XSI(at)Softimage.COM>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 12:45 PM
> Subject: RE: combating heavy aliasing artifacts
>
>
> > With fine, geometry based detail you really need to forget about the
> > threshold level. You have to get the min value up to the same as the
> > max
> > otherwise you miss all the fine detail and if you're doing that the
> > threshold serves no purpose. Also, at that level even if you were
> > keeping
> > min below max, unless you're working with details that are very
> > similar in
> > luminance, again, lowering the threshold will have no effect because
> > it
> > never encounters differences that low anyway. And if you're working
> > with
> > similar luminance then you don't need the anti-aliasing.
> >
> > But, as has already been said, the rasterizer gives better results at
> > better
> > speeds.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > www.kim-aldis.co.uk | kim(at)aldis.co.uk
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On
> >> Behalf Of texturelighting(at)texturelighting.com
> >> Sent: 12 July 2006 15:11
> >> To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
> >> Subject: Re: combating heavy aliasing artifacts
> >>
> >> The anti-aliasing can be increased to a point where the render slows
> >> to
> >> a crawl ie:
> >> .002, .002,.002, and (I am assuming this is a texture problem) you
> >> could add elliptical filtering to the texture map Image Node, which
> >> will also slow down the render, and you could also render the
> >> layer/object separately and blur it in post, but the situation you
> >> have
> >> is a classic example of what-not-to-do; i.e thin parrellel lines.
> >> Is there any way you can perturb the lines' width and separation?
> >> -Robert
> >>
> >>
> >> Eric Deren wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > What's the quickest way to keep a bunch of almost parallel,
> >> > pixel-width lines from going massively Moiré when rendering with
> >> > Mental Ray?
> >> >
> >> > I thought filtering might do it but then I realized that it's a
> >> > post-process.
> >> >
> >> > Anyone have any tricks?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ---
> >> > Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text
> >> > in
> >> > body:
> >> > unsubscribe xsi
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> ---
> >> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in
> >> body:
> >> unsubscribe xsi
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in
> > body:
> > unsubscribe xsi
>
>
> ---
> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
> unsubscribe xsi
_________________________________________________________________
Be one of the first to try Windows Live Mail.
http://ideas.live.com/programpage.aspx?versionId=5d21c51a-b161-4314-9b0e-4911fb2b2e6d
---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi
