Population render quality vs. distance from camera.

Started by bigben, March 28, 2007, 07:52:11 pm

Previous topic - Next topic


March 28, 2007, 07:52:11 pm Last Edit: March 28, 2007, 07:59:04 pm by bigben
The question first ;)
Has anyone done any comparison of object render quality at various distances?... in particular, finding distances at which adjacent render quality settings look the same. e.g. at what distance does a very high quality render of a tree look the same as a high quality render of a tree?

I've done a bit more experimentation with population masking to make it more practical for large populations, reducing RAM usage *and* allowing for a larger FOV. I started from scratch with my building block approach, constructing 3 sets of masks to populations with identical locations/seeds/member objects but different render quality settings.
1: A global density map to define where and at what density I wanted the trees placed
2: A camera FOV map defining an area in which objects could potentially be in frame (based on the masking used in my high-res qtvr test)
3: A set of masks defining 3 separate sperical disance ranges from the camera
4: A set of masks combining each of 3 with 1.

I ran a quick test using distances of 200m, 1km (just past the far edge of the nearest lake) and 20km, with a FOV of 75 degrees using the xfrog birch at 10m spacing.
My camera angle was a little high so I didn't actually get any very high quality trees. The populations were 0, 2500 and 1.4 million and the whole lot, including 3 lakes, rendered in about 40 minutes (detail = 1, AA = 1, GI = 1,1), RAM usage peaked at 720Mb. 

This looks very promising but I really need a more accurate idea of what distances to use for the different render quality settings, and also to check at what render quality reflectivity is dropped... so I thought I'd be lazy and ask if anyone else had tried this already ;)

Once I have this I can start to guess just what sort of area I can populate..