Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12

Thread: Anti-Aliasing with Threshold

  1. #11
    Barrista
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bonnie Auld Scotlin\'
    Posts
    3,643
    Thats double dutch to me Phil.

    I sure hope some of the more advanced members (Colin, Malachi, Al W) know what your talking about.

    I just wanted to say more about the pictures your experimented with, rather than your theory etc.

    Image one=100%
    Image two=400%
    Image three=100%

    It seems to me that the higher you go in percentage, the less the quality of the image seems to change - though this is somewhat affected because a standard monitor is only 72dpi. I guess printed out would show the REAL differences.

    Look at one - it looks very pixelated and is noticable throughout compared to image two and three. Number 2 looks so much more better and the only way really to distinguish between two and three is the long shaped antennae (or whatever they are).

    So as a conclusion, would you say the largest increase in quality would be from say 100% to 200% than say 400% to 500%?

    Its hard to distinguish the differences the higher the anti-aliasing goes...

  2. #12
    Barrista
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Ottawa
    Posts
    5,672
    As it should. So the theory goes, the anti-alias should not stray more than one pixel from your edge. It's not supposed to blur it's supposed to average. But in image 3, the average is better, because there was more points to draw from.

    Status update: I'm just looking for the error in this code...

    Updated a bit for logical problems, still need to fix syntax.

    EDIT: Whoopsie. Don't need those ones...

    Edit: Now with notes!

    (
    ::If a pixel is not Black and...::
    (src(x,y,z)!=0) &&
    (
    :ne of those surrounding the pixel is... ("||" means or)::
    src(x,(y-1),z) ||
    src((x-1),y,z) ||
    src((x+1),y,z) ||
    src(x,(y+1),z)
    )
    == 0) ?

    ::then if the bottom and left one are not white::
    (
    (src((x-1),y,z))
    !=255
    &&
    (src(x,(y-1),z))
    !=255
    )
    ?

    ::average them with the current pixel but give the current pixel value twice the weight::
    (
    (src((x-1),y,z)
    +(src(x,(y-1),z)
    +((src(x,y,z)*2)
    /4
    )
    :therwise...::
    :

    ::if the top and left one are::
    (
    (src((x-1),y,z)
    !=255
    &&
    (src(x,(y+1),z)
    !=255)
    )
    ?

    ::repeat the same::
    (
    src((x-1),y,z)
    +(src(x,(y+1),z)
    +((src(x,y,z)*2)
    /4
    )
    :

    ::same for bottom and right::
    (
    (src((x+1),y,z)
    !=255
    &&
    (src(x,(y-1),z)
    !=255)
    ?

    (
    (src((x+1),y,z)
    +(src(x,(y-1),z)
    +((src(x,y,z)*2)
    /4
    )
    :

    ::...and top and right::
    (
    (src((x+1),y,z)
    !=255
    &&
    (src(x,(y+1),z)
    !=255)
    )
    ?

    (
    (src((x+1),y,z)
    +(src(x,(y+1),z)
    +((src(x,y,z)*2)
    /4
    )
    :therwise...::
    :

    ::the pixel is white::
    255
    [Edited on 18-12-2003 by Phil_The_Rodent]

    [Edited on 18-12-2003 by Phil_The_Rodent]

    [Edited on 18-12-2003 by Phil_The_Rodent]

    [Edited on 18-12-2003 by Phil_The_Rodent]

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •