Downscaling debate

Discuss anything you like on this forum.
Post Reply
User avatar
radiant
Licensed Customer
Posts: 699
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 12:00 pm
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Contact:

Hello guys,

Me and my "know it all" friend was having a debate about the point in rendering 4k images and downscaling them to 1k or a standered resolution.
The question is, is there any point or any difference shown at rendering 4k and downscaling to 1k then to just render a 1k image.

Please be detailed in your answers, he is the kind of guy that always thinks he is always right :lol:

Radiant
Win8 Pro 64bit ULT|Intel Core i7 3930K|3.20 GHz|32 GB RAM|GTX 590|UD5 2011 socket||2x TB HD||Master Cooler HAF X||Blender 2.6||Maya 2012||Octane|
User avatar
steveps3
Licensed Customer
Posts: 1118
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 4:07 pm
Location: England

Down scaling is a good way of reducing noise and increasing sharpness. Other than that, no real point.
(HW) Intel i7 2600k, 16GB DDR3, MSI 560GTX ti (2GB) x 3
(SW) Octane (1.50) Blender (2.70) (exporter 2.02)
(OS) Windows 7(64)
User avatar
t_3
Posts: 2871
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 5:37 pm

steveps3 wrote:Down scaling is a good way of reducing noise and increasing sharpness. Other than that, no real point.
... and reducing noise and increasing sharpness would (or could) mean, that there is more detail in the end than if it was rendered in 1k straight - at least if a scene holds enough details. for lq textures and low polys simple filtering would pretty much give the same effect.
The obvious is that which is never seen until someone expresses it simply

1x i7 2600K @5.0 (Asrock Z77), 16GB, 2x Asus GTX Titan 6GB @1200/3100/6200
2x i7 2600K @4.5 (P8Z68 -V P), 12GB, 1x EVGA GTX 580 3GB @0900/2200/4400
Lyubomir
Licensed Customer
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 3:09 pm

In Indigo RT, the supersampling factor does exactly that - it makes the renderer render at higher resolution and automatically downscales it for the display buffer and final saved image. By bumping this number to 10 I can completely get rid of any firefiles and the output becomes butter smooth without much effect on actual render speed. That would be very good to have in Octane.
i7 2600K, 12GB RAM, GTX 470 x 3, Win 7 64, C4D R11 Studio, VRay, Octane
i7 920, 10GB RAM, GTX 480 x 2, Win 7 64, After Effects CS3, Premiere Pro
3form
Licensed Customer
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 3:51 am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

+ the SS is really good
GTX670 4GB, GTX460 2GB, Q8400 2.27Ghz, 6GB RAM
User avatar
radiance
Posts: 7633
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 2:33 pm

Downscaling support in renderer is a dirty solution imo,
It basically relates to the engine not having a good reconstruction filter in the core when splatting samples onto a film buffer.

There are many different ways to tackle this problem, and many are only suitable for particular types of use.

Personally, i don't see supersampling support in octane to be a good option, the interactivity and GPU memory use of a 4000x4000 render buffer is FAR worse then at an original render resolution.

Then again, as most people always use some image processing app like photoshop or gimp to do final image adjustments, you can just render to 4000x4000 and then downscale in photoshop as you please.

Our priorities are trying to fix the issue propperly, by programming good reconstruction / filtering code.
We could definately add support for supersampling, it's a pretty basic feature to add, but again, if you read the above, you'll realise why it's not on the #1 priority spot right now...

Radiance
Win 7 x64 & ubuntu | 2x GTX480 | Quad 2.66GHz | 8GB
Post Reply

Return to “Off Topic Forum”