It's Sampling at 0 / 0, and filter size at 1 (the minimum).
Each pixel is sampled at least 2^2/min/ times and at most 2^2/max/
times in each direction.
So for 0 / 0 this means 1 x 1, and for 1 / 1 it would mean 4 x 4, or
16 samples per pixel.
The filter /shouldn't/ make any difference, but oddly it does. Box
filtering adds blur and shifts the whole image down and left by half
a pixel (really odd), so take triangle filtering.
Ciao, Daniel!
2007/2/22, Tim Leydecker <BauerOink(at)gmx.de <mailto:BauerOink(at)gmx.de>>:
Hey,
thanks alot guys! I´ve had great success with a projection
of a gradient piped into a constant shader and that one
assigned the partition (like it simple, the backroundpartition).
It´s just that rendering bit that puzzles me. To rinse and repeat,
I use Filtering set to 0/0, or is it 1/1?
That´s the bit I don´t get, how to make sure I have no AA at all.
From there it´s still somewhat challenging to get the correct
mapping (e.g. linear instead of gamma corrected) out of XSI
but that one I should get together by rendering to float/linear.
I can´t test the above today since I´m still working in Maya
but allready do most of my personal stuff in XSI (at home) it
would be great to also optimize that in depth once and for all.
The more I have the chance to compare the apps, the less
satisfied I am with Maya, btw. Especially when shading and
rendering with passes in mind. Oh, boy. Additionally, it´s Maya8...
Cheers
tim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Laffey" <joe(at)laffey.tv <mailto:joe(at)laffey.tv> >
To: <XSI(at)Softimage.COM <mailto:XSI(at)Softimage.COM>>
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 4:18 PM
Subject: RE: 16bit Zdepth?
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Kim Aldis wrote:
>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM <mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM>
[mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM <mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM>] On
>>> Behalf Of Andreas Bystrom
>>> Sent: 22 February 2007 13:25
>>> To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM <mailto:XSI(at)Softimage.COM>
>>> Subject: Re: 16bit Zdepth?
>>>
>>> grab a scalar-state, plug that into a change_range node and
finally
>>> plug the change_range into the surface port, leave the
scalar-state
>>> settings as it is and set the "new range start" to 0 and "new
range
>>> end" to 1 in the change range node, your old and new-range
parameters
>>> should be set to the distance where you want the depth-pass to
start
>>> and end, you can link these 2 values to nulls with an
expression and
>>> use those to control the depth-pass
>
>
>> You may also find that a linear falloff isn't necessarily what
you need.
>> Plugging the output of the change range into a grad will allow
you to tweak
>> it, if you need to.
>>
>
> I think the non-linear mapping would be better done in the
compositor, though. That
> way you have the option of linear or putting a curve on it.
>
> --
> Joe Laffey | Visual Effects for Film and Video
> LAFFEY Computer Imaging |
-------------------------------------
> St. Louis, MO | Show Reel http://LAFFEY.tv/?e04685
> USA |
-------------------------------------
> . | -*- Digital Fusion Plugins -*-
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Mail here will be rejected --> "Real Trap" <
r_trap(at)laffeycomputer.com <mailto:r_trap(at)laffeycomputer.com>>
> ---
> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM
<mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM> with the following text in body:
> unsubscribe xsi
---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM
<mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM> with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi
