SU Podium Forum
Sign up Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
biebel

Avatar / Picture

Render Wizard
Registered:
Posts: 1,130
Reply with quote  #1 
Hi all,

I was wondering what your experiences are concerning the following multiple choice  statements/questions:

1. If  I choose a 'bigger' image size to render I can....
     a. lower the quality slider and still have same good output
     b. increase the quality slider because it is needed to have same good output.
     c. keep quality slider at the same level, because the quality slider isn't relative to 
         image size

2. If I choose a 'bigger' image size to render I can..
     a. lower the jaggy slider and still have the same crispness
     b. increase the jaggy slider in order to have the same crispness.
     c. leave the jaggy slider to the same position...because jaggy slider isn't relative 
         to  image size.

Actually these are questions.
I don't know why i put them in a multiple choice form....but i hope you get the point.
It is interesting to know what the relation between image size and quality/jaggy is because it influences render time.
Perhaps the conclusions can save us render time.

thanks,
biebel



paulmunro

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 238
Reply with quote  #2 
Hi, basicly I reckon that you can decrease the quality and smoothness of a render, providing that you render a larger image and decrease it's size afterwards. (for the same effect).

BUT WHY DO THAT!?

Might as well just render a smaller image with higher quality.

I don't have much experience using podium yet, though it seems that the first option isn't really gonna save much time

Any others opinions?



bigstick

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 10,704
Reply with quote  #3 

Interesting...

I always think that if you render big, you need to increase quality settings, because certainly antialiasing is more noticeable on larger images, and also any artifacts.

 

On smaller images, I tend to keep quality slightly lower.

 

I have done as Paul suggests in the past, and rendered an image larger than I need, and resampled it to reduce it in size. This always gives better quality images than 'plain' renders IMHO. I have done this when I have had grainy renders, that have taken a long time and to an extent it does reduce the image noise.

 

What I don't know however, is whether you will get better or faster results by rendering a larger image at lower quality, and then reducing (resampling obviously) the image to the size you want.


__________________

That which does not kill us makes us stronger
-Friedrich Nietzsche

Fella77

Avatar / Picture

Master Commentator
Registered:
Posts: 1,192
Reply with quote  #4 

All that makes sense...but since I purchased the full version of Podium..I love the way 1024x768 renders look with sliders @100%. Whenever I render at smaller sizes it always seems to me that the detail gets a little obscured..I really wonder if you rendered @1024x768, @ lesser quality and reduced the image size to 800x600, if it REALLY would be as good a quality as the 800x600 rendered at 100% sliders...

 

my head hurts..


__________________
Ready....Set....Render!
solo75080

Avatar / Picture

Texture King
Registered:
Posts: 2,487
Reply with quote  #5 

Depending on the design complexity and the amount of curves in it, I found that rendering larger and reducing is quicker than smaller with higher settings. The problem with larger is the post AA work and smaller with high quality is the pre work. at the end I suppose it's a much of a muchness....


__________________
http://www.solosplace.com

biebel

Avatar / Picture

Render Wizard
Registered:
Posts: 1,130
Reply with quote  #6 
Quote:
Originally Posted by solo75080

Depending on the design complexity and the amount of curves in it, I found that rendering larger and reducing is quicker than smaller with higher settings. The problem with larger is the post AA work and smaller with high quality is the pre work. at the end I suppose it's a much of a muchness....



That's usefull feedback.
I also noticed that when going for larger images the antialiasing phaze takes relatively much longer.
It sometimes happens to me that the ray tracing phase is done in e.g 1 hour, while antialiasing phase keeps on going for hours...very often resulting in giving up waiting and killing the rendering after all.
This is one of the reasons I made this thread....

Thanks Solo for that meaningfull reply.

regards,
biebel
Fella77

Avatar / Picture

Master Commentator
Registered:
Posts: 1,192
Reply with quote  #7 

Ok, I see your meaningful reply and raise you a question...what are your reduced settings, say if I set to 2048x1536, to end up with 1024x768 for the sliders? 50%?...but then don't you run the risk of the crop circles appearing?

 

David


__________________
Ready....Set....Render!
biebel

Avatar / Picture

Render Wizard
Registered:
Posts: 1,130
Reply with quote  #8 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fella77

Ok, I see your meaningful reply and raise you a question...what are your reduced settings, say if I set to 2048x1536, to end up with 1024x768 for the sliders? 50%?...but then don't you run the risk of the crop circles appearing?

 

David



You have a point there.
Lowering the quality slider too much ends up giving artifacts.
The 'jaggy' (antialiasing) slider is another thing:
When increasing the image size you have more pixels on screen...and thus automatically less antialising right? So it could be reasonable to think that you can lower the 'jaggy' slider when going for a big image....

BTW, all posts were meaningfull


sepo

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 4,371
Reply with quote  #9 

It seems logical if you intend to reduce the size of image that the AA could be reduced. I don't think there is formula for it. It is hit and miss. I also think that you can reduce a bit quality but not to extent as jaggy.

 

It all depends on model. If you have a lot fine detailing (wires etc.)than I am afraid AA should stay put.

Fella77

Avatar / Picture

Master Commentator
Registered:
Posts: 1,192
Reply with quote  #10 

Oh... I see..just the AA slider gets lowered not the quality when doing an image reduction type render..I was thinking both but that makes more sense.

Ya I agree Sepo...if the model has allot of fine detail I would just leave everything @ above 80% and set to my finished image size and tough out the cook time

 

David

Biebel..no worries..I was just making a poker reference


__________________
Ready....Set....Render!
A_Minima

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 85
Reply with quote  #11 
One function that could be implemented into one next version :
--> a dpi value to choose the dpi resolution regarding to the use of your render : big size printing, A4, A3, web... a kind of printing-wizard file outpout.

Fella77

Avatar / Picture

Master Commentator
Registered:
Posts: 1,192
Reply with quote  #12 

Good idea Minima..you should move it to the suggestion box!


__________________
Ready....Set....Render!
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.