Rendered with CPU only at resolution 832x512
Images with 100 and 800 spp were taken without frame averaging (only 1 iteration)
Images with 2, 8, 16, 32 spp taken with frame averaging (averaging samples of several frames)
2 spp
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1cb75/1cb75bee5b8cbb9ff2d5184a94360184b718f1f6" alt=""
8 spp
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e7630/e76308d36e6ac51c30aad8392cb7a923b9485b3c" alt=""
16 spp
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/09546/09546f563e5837cd2399239b57dd972f1699fc57" alt=""
32 spp
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/31701/31701dd2bcd0b55e5785ce96220436715867f058" alt=""
100 spp
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fd23f/fd23f7670becbbeb1b0d2d7ef6a2879d2b014d2d" alt=""
800 spp
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6e222/6e2221c23f8619eaba6e0288e6c3ccee58b2c7ce" alt=""
To top it off, one big image comparing 800, 8, 16 and 32 spp. It amazes me that the quality of just 8 samples is already great and with some filtering it could rival the quality of the 800 spp image:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/47a03/47a038df25a1515fe8f30ef13d64e7568f5a5339" alt=""
No comments:
Post a Comment