This is Marcosalvi's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Marcosalvi's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
FXAA is a clever technique but in practice is not nearly as good as mentioned in this article. It might look good on screenshots but it does little to eliminate temporal artifacts due to aliasing. The reason is simple: it doesn't have enough information to work with as visibility is evaluated only once per pixel. FXAA won't do much for sub-pixel features. Obviously this doesn't make FXAA a useless technique but there is no free lunch in computer graphics and if you want to eliminate the byproduct of an insufficient sampling rate (aliasing) you need to increase the sampling rate one way or another. FXAA does this implicitly by reconstructing a signal making certain assumptions, when those assumptions fail FXAA (or any other AA technique) fails. BTW, unlike what is mentioned in this article MSAA is imo way less hacky than FXAA, it's actually a very good way of attacking the problem and it is much more effective than many post-processing techniques in reducing the amount of spatial and temporal aliasing. MSAA and variations of it are here to stay because it is a clever way of handling anti-aliasing without increasing too much the cost of shading. FXAA and similar approaches are so cheap and easy to use but on the long run techniques that properly decouple visibility from shading and that handle visibility at higher rates are the way to go and the video linked by smithee shows this very well given that the AA methods based purely on post-processing the image clearly do a terrible job at eliminating temporal aliasing. *The opinions expressed herein are my own personal opinions and do not represent my employer's view in any way*
Marcosalvi is now following The Typepad Team
Dec 10, 2011