In this example, the benefits of anti-aliasing are only apparent when you zoom far into the image and see individual pixels. Do you think we can get away with aliasing as long as the pixels are small enough? Why or why not?
Sicheng-Pan
Since our eyes are not perfect, we cannot distinguish individual pixels when the they are small enough, and I think our eyes may "supersample" the pixels for us. In that scenario I think we may not notice the jiggles even if they still physically exists on the screen.
waleedlatif1
In the lecture we compared the effects of point sampling to antialiasing and I understand why the blurring effect would (at the correct viewing distance) alleviate the jaggies effect, but I'm left wondering whether there are any use cases for point sampling? From my understanding, point sampling is obviously much more efficient since the rasterization process is binary (red/white) whereas there is a blurred effect on the antialiasing process that results in then pixels being some combination of red/white.
sZwX74
I think the main benefit of point sampling is performance as we don't have to prefilter the image and only need to sample once per pixel. This could be useful if we don't care as much about how the image looks, we're just trying to optimize for speed and performance.
StaffDanCubed
It is possible that even if the pixels are small enough, aliasing can still be noticeable because it causes us to perceive macroscopic features that are not supposed to be there? I remember something like the Moire pattern being shown earlier in the lecture, and I don't know if it is exactly applicable to this scenario, but perhaps something similar?
geos98
I believe this is true at least for the jaggies. From my experience in gaming, If we have a screen with high enough PPI (i.e., small enough pixel), and we render the entire screen space (that is, we render the full resolution), anti-aliasing is not really necessary. However, this is both resource intensive (for the same screen size, higher PPI implies higher resolution, which requires more resource to render), and wasteful. By applying anti-aliasing, we could get a similar result without needing all these resources.
(Seed for discussion)
In this example, the benefits of anti-aliasing are only apparent when you zoom far into the image and see individual pixels. Do you think we can get away with aliasing as long as the pixels are small enough? Why or why not?
Since our eyes are not perfect, we cannot distinguish individual pixels when the they are small enough, and I think our eyes may "supersample" the pixels for us. In that scenario I think we may not notice the jiggles even if they still physically exists on the screen.
In the lecture we compared the effects of point sampling to antialiasing and I understand why the blurring effect would (at the correct viewing distance) alleviate the jaggies effect, but I'm left wondering whether there are any use cases for point sampling? From my understanding, point sampling is obviously much more efficient since the rasterization process is binary (red/white) whereas there is a blurred effect on the antialiasing process that results in then pixels being some combination of red/white.
I think the main benefit of point sampling is performance as we don't have to prefilter the image and only need to sample once per pixel. This could be useful if we don't care as much about how the image looks, we're just trying to optimize for speed and performance.
It is possible that even if the pixels are small enough, aliasing can still be noticeable because it causes us to perceive macroscopic features that are not supposed to be there? I remember something like the Moire pattern being shown earlier in the lecture, and I don't know if it is exactly applicable to this scenario, but perhaps something similar?
I believe this is true at least for the jaggies. From my experience in gaming, If we have a screen with high enough PPI (i.e., small enough pixel), and we render the entire screen space (that is, we render the full resolution), anti-aliasing is not really necessary. However, this is both resource intensive (for the same screen size, higher PPI implies higher resolution, which requires more resource to render), and wasteful. By applying anti-aliasing, we could get a similar result without needing all these resources.