
Note: no gamma-correction has been done on these images.
| Sampling Type | 1 sample/pixel, hat filter | 4 samples/pixel, hat filter | 16 samples/pixel, hat filter | 16 samples/pixel, tent filter | 16 samples/pixel, circle filter | 256 samples/pixel, hat filter | 256 samples/pixel, tent filter | 256 samples/pixel, circle filter |
Uniform |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Jittered |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Regular |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Multi-Jittered |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||
| Sampling Type | Depth = 2, hat filter | Depth = 4, hat filter | Depth = 9, hat filter | Depth = 9, tent filter | Depth = 9, circle filter | |||
Adaptive 1 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||||
Adaptive 2 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
The adaptive methods work as described in the previous page. The first method works OK for the foreground, but the background contains high-frequency noise and some artifacts due to the method's underlying regularity. The second method works much better, producing images that are almost as good as the multi-jittered images. They do contain some noise in the background, but no artifacts.