Hmmm... I suspect the confusion here is caused by a simple piece of missing information. That piece is that it makes absolutely no sense to speak of resolution without also specifying the output device. When one says that Bryce renders at 72 ppi(pixels per inch) this is based on the implicit assumption that the output device is the user's monitor. The usual standard for such a device is 72ppi (although this may vary, usually to 96ppi). Printer resolution is usually stated as dpi (dots per inch). This is not quite the same thing as ppi but for our purposes may be considered approximately equivalent. The second most common standard for printers is lpi (lines per inch). That figure may be converted to ppi or vice versa. So if you have an image file with ppi dimensions of 800x600 that would display as 11.11"x8.33" [(800/72)x(600/72)] on a 72 ppi monitor screen. The same file would display as 2.66"x2" [(800/300)x(600/300)] on a printer with 300dpi resolution. Therefore if you want a final print of 11"x14" you must first determine the resolution of the printer that will be used. Assuming this to be 300dpi Bryce must render the image at 3300x4200 [(11300)x(14300)]. Antialiasing is a method whereby individual pixels are coloured at the border between two different colours. By altering the ratio or mix of these coloured pixels on both sides of this boundary we achieve a smoother blend between the two, thus minimizing jagged edges. It is really a matter of our perception rather than reality but it works well. Higher resolutions, and thus more pixels, will allow a smoother visual gradient between the two colours and this in turn will be interpreted as superior. Other than that, I do not think resolution is a factor in the antialiasing process. There are other factors besides resolution that determine the quality of the final print but as this discussion is about resolution I will leave it at that. By the way, while it is true that image editors such as Photoshop can be used to alter resolution one must take care when doing so. Reducing resolution is not too bad as one is simply discarding information. But when you increase resolution you are expecting to create additional information that does not already exist. Within modest limits this can work reasonably well but if you become too ambitious the results are rarely satisfactory if you are expecting a reasonable facsimile of the original. Of course, what is acceptable to one may be a disaster to someone else so as they say, "Your mileage may differ." In the end, if you are working towards a largish print you will probably have to render to disk- unless you have an incredibly huge monitor (grin).