[Bf-committers] Does Cycles waste half it's possible performance or am i wrong?

Brecht Van Lommel brechtvanlommel at pandora.be
Sat Oct 27 23:45:33 CEST 2012


This is a topic to discuss on the bf-cycles mailing list. We use a
different pixel filtering method which fits better on the GPU. If you
set the filter width to 10 then yes, you might be wasting half the
samples. But for a typical filter width the number of wasted samples
would be quite small in my opinion. Still it would be good to improve
this, but I'm not sure where the half the samples number comes from.


On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
<tobias.oelgarte at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
> I'm curios why i never see fireflies in cycles that affect more then one
> pixel. I have chosen to speak about fireflies, because they are the most
> unique sample that one could observe. It doesn't matter if set the
> gaussian filter to 1.5 or 10. The fireflies, no matter how strong they
> are, only cover one pixel. I see no distribution to other pixels of the
> film. If I'm not mistaken then i should see this sample contributing to
> at least four pixels (except the sample is perfectly centred and
> gaussian is 1.0).
> So I'm wondering why this samples do not contribute to neighbour pixels.
> If they would, then it would expect a significant noise reduction.
> (about half the samples for same result)
> Greetings from
> Tobias Oelgarte
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

More information about the Bf-committers mailing list