Hi Brecht,<div><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">This could be done, however you can't actually do correct alpha<br>
operations if the background is part of the combined result...<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I understand the risk, but this option is usual in many renders, like Vray. The alpha is just an information that can be used in compositions. Some times is good to have alpha mask just to saturate a non-trasparent background, without the need of complex render layers, for example.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I think it is more intuitive that the alpha slot in render layer always give alpha mask, no matter the trasnparent status.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I think this behavior helps guide people to the<br>
right solution.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I believe in freedom :D</div><div> </div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">
> It would be also nice to have the option of saving the alpha channel in a<br>
> image file wihout transperency composed (not premultiplied).<br>
<br>
</div>This will be added, but not in the way it's done for blender internal.<br>
This should be a feature of the image saving and dependent on the<br>
image file format.<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Nice!</div><div> </div><div><br></div><div>Adriano</div></div></div>