FATfoe opened this issue on Jun 23, 2001 ยท 5 posts
FATfoe posted Sat, 23 June 2001 at 12:37 PM
whats the difference?, does anyone know, cuz I dont.
mf193 posted Sat, 23 June 2001 at 4:40 PM
From what i can tell, the most noticable difference is light intereactions. In the raytracer, light is not refracted and applied as well as in the hybrid ray tracer. Also, there seems to be a slight speed improvement in the hybrid. I've never really seen a use for the raytracer, i dont know why its included along with the hybrid.
kaom posted Sat, 23 June 2001 at 6:12 PM
I thought it was the opposite, I thoought the Hybrid had some bad flaws, and was told at one time not to use it. Do you know which one gives better antialiasing qualitiy? I'm torn on the subject. I just wnat the absolute highest quality in my renders. Any clue?
kaom posted Sun, 24 June 2001 at 12:13 PM
mf193, I think you might be right, the Hybrid is slightly faster. Check my new message from last night and look at the images I posted, I did a little test comparing both renderers, but I'm torn as to which gives a higher quality render.
AzChip posted Mon, 25 June 2001 at 10:06 AM
I think the labels got reversed in mf193's comment -- the RayTracer is the slower, but higher quality rendering engine. The hybrid renderer renders only the edges of objects, any transparencies and refractions and such; it guesses and just kind of fills in the blanks on the rest of the image (interpolation, I believe is the technical term for filling in the blanks). I usually don't use the hybrid except for tests early-on during the model construction process. After that, the hybrid just generates too many funky artifacts for my comfort level. For the best quality, stick with the RayTracer.