Aye, I agree with you there, Kemal. There are advantages to either method, it's nice to have a few different ways to do things! Mostly, I'm concerned with speed. Often-times I've heard of people doubling their image size at render time, just to try to get some kind of smoother results. I've seen it work, but I've never seen it take less time necessarily. In this case, rendering a double-sized image with the Volumetric light on is not possible. Rendering a Volumetric with no AA, and then compositing it over the non-Volume with AA, produced similar results to full AA in about 1/3rd the time it would take to do the whole scene with Volumetrics. Also, if you throw in the Equalizer effects, you end up with a nice mix of techniques, and it makes for a really soft render. Mostly i'm bringing it up because a lot of people don't feel comfy with Volumtric lighting. It takes FOREVER on Bryce, and in most other programs it's not much different. Here's a pre-post-work composite, layers are: Distance on bottom, Non-Volume AA render in the middle set to "Hard Light", and the Volumetric EQ-filtered image on top set to "Lighten". Any better than the image in #1, at the top? Notice how the volumetric light rays tend to blur out the details behind them, and the areas of shadow are starker and crisper... Adds a bit of depth to things. Wwhat I'm trying to say is that it's not always necessary to let the volume pass finish all the way. Get your lighting detail, then run it as a "Lighten" layer in post, on top of the non-Volume render. Boom! You've saved yourself hours, in this case DAYS, of downtime.