I know. I was agreeing with you.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Killzone Shadow Fall uses FXAA + TMAA
- Thread starter Loudninja
- Start date
I know. I was agreeing with you.
Well fuck me.
i interpreted his his post to mean cost of resources...not currency...
unholyrevenger72
Banned
Well excuse me. I tried to make my post as Stupid as possible so no one could take it seriously. At least RoboPlato had a level headed response or perhaps he too was being sarcastic and i missed out on the genius of the post
edit: nevermind RoboPlato got it it was just you.
SMAA 1X and T2X are cheap. They have higher memory usage than FXAA [cost of two framebuffers essentially], but they are only a little more expensive.
========
This comparison is awful.
Thats not true. SMAA do not touch textures at all, it has completely different detection algorithm than FXAA, also part of FXAA is contrast adaptation that changes overall image quite a lot.
You don't need to be dev to review full product.
Different types of AA are commonly available on PC and one can compare different methods easily.
Dragon1893
Member
MSAA is too demanding, we're stuck with post-process AA, frame-rate penalty isn't worth the trade-off in IQ. They have been refining it though so it can look decent. This combo of TXAA and FXAA seems to be doing a good job here.
I've had cases of using FXAA instead of MSAA on PC because of the boost in frame-rate so I'm not surprised that developers opt for the same solution.
You look at your options and try to find the right balance between IQ and performance. The game is native 1080p so it still looks nice and sharp.
Dictator93
Member
LukasTaves
Member
The game had great IQ when I played it on BGS except for some shimmering occurring in the vegetation...
Nothing major, and it only stood out because the game had otherwise a pretty clean look, but it was noticeable...
I wonder if the BGS build is before they applied TMAA, which could solve the shimmering on thin geometry...
Nothing major, and it only stood out because the game had otherwise a pretty clean look, but it was noticeable...
I wonder if the BGS build is before they applied TMAA, which could solve the shimmering on thin geometry...
dr_rus
Member
Sure it does - just like every other post-AA solution out there it works on a frame buffer content which contain textures as well. It's an extension of MLAA which is running a search of high contrast areas in the frame buffer. It is very good at preserving the image sharpness though since this is one of the stated goals of SMAA development in general. But it does eliminate shader and texture aliasing to some degree as well as edge aliasing.
Dictator93
Member
Watching the 500 MB vid again, does anyone know where this dithering is coming from? It seems to not just apply to shadows or vegtation.. like in the SSAO or something?
It is kinda everywhere.. .even more so than the Witcher 2's dithering.#
Is that a video artifact?
It is kinda everywhere.. .even more so than the Witcher 2's dithering.#
Is that a video artifact?
TheLaughingStock
Member
There's a refined implementation in Ryse. So, there you go.
I'm curious if everyone that is shitting all over TXAA as a rule has really looked at the direct feeds and new high bit-rate video for KZ:SF?
The devil is in the details, and it seems their implementation combined with TMAA does not have major issues with blurriness.
The devil is in the details, and it seems their implementation combined with TMAA does not have major issues with blurriness.
Seems to have basically none. I think people who are automatically shitting on FXAA probably haven't seen the media around Shadow Fall, to realise that GG's implementation has reaped the benefits without any of the negatives. Knee jerk reactions without much foundation.
Petalpusher
Banned
Some don't realize that they praise BF4 PC that has some FXAA activated in Ultra mode, the difference is they use it with MSAA at the same time, it's basically a different SMAA, with the multi sampling component. Wich is the best of both word.
High quality and modern FXAA are usefull and not blurry, but it doesn't treat everything and games will always ideally need some MSAA, especially for mid and long distance thin geometry (cables,..) and high frequency/motion artefacts.
It's complicated to add MSAA on launch titles wich have kinda rushed render pipelines, it consumes a lot of bandwidth, while they precisely are games not using their bandwidth very efficiently (and at 1080p60)
High quality and modern FXAA are usefull and not blurry, but it doesn't treat everything and games will always ideally need some MSAA, especially for mid and long distance thin geometry (cables,..) and high frequency/motion artefacts.
It's complicated to add MSAA on launch titles wich have kinda rushed render pipelines, it consumes a lot of bandwidth, while they precisely are games not using their bandwidth very efficiently (and at 1080p60)
Maleficence
Member
FXAA - Just Stop.
dr_rus
Member
It's not complicated, it's just too much of a performance hit for console h/w while the difference between MSAA and some FXAA/MLAA/SMAA post-AA solution will be close to non-existent for a wider public.
We have people here who seriously say that they can't see any difference between 720p and 1080p and you expect them to see a difference between MSAA and FXAA?
I fully expect that post-AA solutions are going to be the norm in this coming generation. They're "good enough" for an average console player and provide a huge win in bandwidth consumption which may go to better pixel shaders for example.
velociraptor
Junior Member
Interesting. I wonder what they perceive to be the cons of SMAA? I generally find FXAA to be the worst out of the bunch because it actually hurts image quality.looks like someone did ask him about SMAA
SMAA isn't even that demanding, especially compared to MSAA, and it looks just as good. If given the choice, I would always go with SMAA over MSAA given the massive performance benefit.
BONKERS
Member
http://youtu.be/mjc0a-MxqsY
Just look at the difference it makes!
I was excited when they mentioned TMAA in their first slideshow about SF's rendering Tech!
And I was right to be!
Just look at all the hard specular aliasing on buildings and specular highlights. THey are still somewhat aliased, but they don't move AT ALL in motion!
And that's the hardest thing to deal with with specular aliasing. And it improves IQ so much and they are so much closer to the Killzone 2 Target render than ever before now!
Also:
Just an FYI for those wondering about SMAA, SMAA can't handle specular aliasng and a lot of temporal aliasing (Aliasing over time in motion). 4x can get some stuff, but it generally fails really hard at any kind of specular aliasing. Of which was SF's biggest issue.
FXAA does a better job at handling specular aliasing than SMAA does due to it's blurring nature. And at a high resolution the blurring of IQ is going to be far less of an issue.
With what I assume is the temporal component of TMAA (Temporal Multisampling Anti Aliasing?) combined with FXAA really helps tame the specular issues this game has for the most part.
Something SMAA would not be able to do.
Just look at the difference it makes!
I was excited when they mentioned TMAA in their first slideshow about SF's rendering Tech!
And I was right to be!
Just look at all the hard specular aliasing on buildings and specular highlights. THey are still somewhat aliased, but they don't move AT ALL in motion!
And that's the hardest thing to deal with with specular aliasing. And it improves IQ so much and they are so much closer to the Killzone 2 Target render than ever before now!
Also:
Just an FYI for those wondering about SMAA, SMAA can't handle specular aliasng and a lot of temporal aliasing (Aliasing over time in motion). 4x can get some stuff, but it generally fails really hard at any kind of specular aliasing. Of which was SF's biggest issue.
FXAA does a better job at handling specular aliasing than SMAA does due to it's blurring nature. And at a high resolution the blurring of IQ is going to be far less of an issue.
With what I assume is the temporal component of TMAA (Temporal Multisampling Anti Aliasing?) combined with FXAA really helps tame the specular issues this game has for the most part.
Something SMAA would not be able to do.
Dictator93
Member
looks like someone did ask him about SMAA
His pros and cons must have been performance for pixel coverage. It is more expensive than FXAA.
looks like someone did ask him about SMAA
I hate that these kind of things are not asked by someone more competent in a face to face interview who would follow up that with "What were the cons for SMAA?" or "How did FXAA (+TMAA) come out on top?"
I really hope they do another post-mortem presentation.
Always-honest
Banned
It looks great. But if you download the Gamersyde vid of this then you'll notice a bit more shimmering.
Still, awesome.
I think that's exactly why some people care this much actually. I don't personally as eliminating jaggies is great but one of my lower graphical concerns, but some people do hate how blurry FXAA looks to them.
RockmanWhore
Member
So basically Killzone uses to type of AA. That makes it a AAAA game right? So it's barelly as good as Halo 4. Come on Guerilla Games, step up your game, you're not even trying.
BONKERS
Member
I honestly hope we see more of TMAA this generation.
AA and IQ are really my biggest qualms with consoles due to their lack of power capable of having that while pushing the graphical envelope.
TMAA+FXAA certainly helps level the playing field a lot and I also assume that Knack is also using TMAA at the very least and is one of the reasons why it looks so great.
It also exhibits the same behaviors of the aliasing that still exists after the AA.
It's there, there are some hard edges. But it does not move over time. It stays stationary and that's what helps create a temporally coherent image to the user that helps sell belivability of the realism.
Another example of how FXAA isn't turrible at high resolutions either,
here are some old screenshots I took of playing Crysis at 1080p30 (With heavily modified CVARs) when I played on my old GPU with the in game EdgeAA @ R_edgeAA=2 +FXAA
(These are pretty lossy JPEGs unfortunately, because Crysis's default screen cap and steam's were set to really lossy back then. Harms IQ more than FXAA does)
http://i5.minus.com/ib2yO0Mh2LpcJl.jpg
http://i3.minus.com/ibzqOusci61rU5.jpg
http://i4.minus.com/ibnAERvTaWP52z.jpg
http://i4.minus.com/iKmrdz1zyOvaN.jpg
http://i7.minus.com/ibkWmAvK8QDQZU.jpg
http://i5.minus.com/i67pVfxIIE2JD.jpg
http://i7.minus.com/ibkQyjbg9PTBRR.jpg
(What is left really is mostly just specular aliasing issues, which causes the most problems with aliasing in motion. But in it's defense, this is a problem with Crysis in general. Not even 4xSGSSAA can completely clean it up)
Yeah it's not completely gone in the YT video either(Like when they are showing the first differences with Volumetric lighting), but it's a huge step up for consoles IMO and for Killzone in General compared to something like FXAA or SMAA by themselves.
and honestly, if developers could rewrite their specular lighting models or incorporate something like specular AA in the shading pipeline it would make cleaning up the last of the remaining aliasing issues much less of a hassle. Specular aliasing is probably one of the larger aliasing issues IMO
http://blog.selfshadow.com/2011/07/22/specular-showdown/
AA and IQ are really my biggest qualms with consoles due to their lack of power capable of having that while pushing the graphical envelope.
TMAA+FXAA certainly helps level the playing field a lot and I also assume that Knack is also using TMAA at the very least and is one of the reasons why it looks so great.
It also exhibits the same behaviors of the aliasing that still exists after the AA.
It's there, there are some hard edges. But it does not move over time. It stays stationary and that's what helps create a temporally coherent image to the user that helps sell belivability of the realism.
Another example of how FXAA isn't turrible at high resolutions either,
here are some old screenshots I took of playing Crysis at 1080p30 (With heavily modified CVARs) when I played on my old GPU with the in game EdgeAA @ R_edgeAA=2 +FXAA
(These are pretty lossy JPEGs unfortunately, because Crysis's default screen cap and steam's were set to really lossy back then. Harms IQ more than FXAA does)
http://i5.minus.com/ib2yO0Mh2LpcJl.jpg
http://i3.minus.com/ibzqOusci61rU5.jpg
http://i4.minus.com/ibnAERvTaWP52z.jpg
http://i4.minus.com/iKmrdz1zyOvaN.jpg
http://i7.minus.com/ibkWmAvK8QDQZU.jpg
http://i5.minus.com/i67pVfxIIE2JD.jpg
http://i7.minus.com/ibkQyjbg9PTBRR.jpg
(What is left really is mostly just specular aliasing issues, which causes the most problems with aliasing in motion. But in it's defense, this is a problem with Crysis in general. Not even 4xSGSSAA can completely clean it up)
Yeah it's not completely gone in the YT video either(Like when they are showing the first differences with Volumetric lighting), but it's a huge step up for consoles IMO and for Killzone in General compared to something like FXAA or SMAA by themselves.
and honestly, if developers could rewrite their specular lighting models or incorporate something like specular AA in the shading pipeline it would make cleaning up the last of the remaining aliasing issues much less of a hassle. Specular aliasing is probably one of the larger aliasing issues IMO
http://blog.selfshadow.com/2011/07/22/specular-showdown/
Always-honest
Banned
You'd hope they are able to use the best possible solution for a game, that's all. Weird question to be honest. Unless you want to tell us something about pc gaming we don't know...
SneakyStephan
Banned
velociraptor
Junior Member
It sucks because most journalists wouldn't come close to asking questions like that.
Your tag is spot on. The game look fantastic.
FXAA is fast approximate AA. Like the name implies, it favors speed over image quality, so image quality can look a bit fuzzier. The general consensus is that FXAA does not look as good as MLAA, but that it has less impact on performance (3-5%).
FXAA does not directly address temporal aliasing. It may also not anti-alias all edges in a scene.
TMAA is Transparency Anti-aliasing, designed to handle flat pictures with see-through areas (Billboards, Decals or Point Sprites in 3D graphics lingo) differently from real 3D models. So you can see how that would be used in conjunction with another method for anything not transparent.
BONKERS
Member
More examples of FXAA not being crap.
PokerNight 2 rendered at 3200x1800 with In game AA on + FXAA downsampled to 1600x900 (2x2 OGSSAA)
http://i.minus.com/iotG865utdO9w.png
Compared to 8xSGSSAA at 1600x900
http://i.minus.com/i2Nj3NGX2CreI.png
And in motion it handles aliasing nearly just as well as SGSSAA without the performance hit.
Iron Brigade rendered at 3200x1800 with 4xMSAA and FXAA downsampled to 1600x900
http://i.minus.com/i2Nj3NGX2CreI.png
Compared to 8xSGSSAA at 1600x900
http://i2.minus.com/iBSC93Mc5kr0u.png
Showing what little difference (And there IS some difference. Once downsampled however those differences disappear)there is between SMAA 1x at high resolutions compared to FXAA
Bionic Commando Rearmed rendered at 3200x1800
NoAA http://i4.minus.com/ibqaXJdKaFal2e.png
FXAA http://i2.minus.com/iuZzH57L8RQH5.png
SMAA 1x with custom settings http://i1.minus.com/icakthP4idQRw.png
Once Downsampled
FXAA http://i.minus.com/ibzOAp2kJ7wKIk.png
SMAA http://i.minus.com/iby4hAFkXFPJKq.png
Vs 8xSGSSAA http://i.minus.com/ibtNNr8HzZxION.png
Castlevania Lords of Shadow
3200x1800 FXAA downsampled 1920x1080 http://i4.minus.com/ibmYrhkUOPZfkC.png
Vs
1920x1080 4xSGSSAA http://i3.minus.com/ibvYgNz0dnPgD6.png
An old Zoomed comparison at 1080p of Binary Domain
1080p Native (No downsampling) 4xSGSSAA http://i4.minus.com/ibmxoQ7gcukgZz.png
1080p Native (No downsampling) 4xMSAA+4xTrSSAA+FXAA http://i2.minus.com/iuP7qWczQoVHP.png
Many of these comparisons may seem irrelevant. But it shows that FXAA is not so bad at high resolutions and can even look better IQ wise than SGSSAA, the current holy grail on PC depending on the game.
Also: TMAA has not been confirmed to be Transparency Anti Aliasing has it?
I'm pretty sure it's not. If it was, it would be called something like TrMAA or TrSSAA(Or TrSGSSSAA if you want to use the correct naming) like it is on PC would it not?
Or perhaps it is, and the T has a double meaning for Transparency and Temporal Multi sampling Anti Aliasing
And please don't forget, that Killzone Shadow Fall was ORIGINALLY shown with nothing BUT FXAA (From E3 onward). Until recently when they've implemented TMAA underneath it.
http://i6.minus.com/ibjng3oNOeWpuo.png
PokerNight 2 rendered at 3200x1800 with In game AA on + FXAA downsampled to 1600x900 (2x2 OGSSAA)
http://i.minus.com/iotG865utdO9w.png
Compared to 8xSGSSAA at 1600x900
http://i.minus.com/i2Nj3NGX2CreI.png
And in motion it handles aliasing nearly just as well as SGSSAA without the performance hit.
Iron Brigade rendered at 3200x1800 with 4xMSAA and FXAA downsampled to 1600x900
http://i.minus.com/i2Nj3NGX2CreI.png
Compared to 8xSGSSAA at 1600x900
http://i2.minus.com/iBSC93Mc5kr0u.png
Showing what little difference (And there IS some difference. Once downsampled however those differences disappear)there is between SMAA 1x at high resolutions compared to FXAA
Bionic Commando Rearmed rendered at 3200x1800
NoAA http://i4.minus.com/ibqaXJdKaFal2e.png
FXAA http://i2.minus.com/iuZzH57L8RQH5.png
SMAA 1x with custom settings http://i1.minus.com/icakthP4idQRw.png
Once Downsampled
FXAA http://i.minus.com/ibzOAp2kJ7wKIk.png
SMAA http://i.minus.com/iby4hAFkXFPJKq.png
Vs 8xSGSSAA http://i.minus.com/ibtNNr8HzZxION.png
Castlevania Lords of Shadow
3200x1800 FXAA downsampled 1920x1080 http://i4.minus.com/ibmYrhkUOPZfkC.png
Vs
1920x1080 4xSGSSAA http://i3.minus.com/ibvYgNz0dnPgD6.png
An old Zoomed comparison at 1080p of Binary Domain
1080p Native (No downsampling) 4xSGSSAA http://i4.minus.com/ibmxoQ7gcukgZz.png
1080p Native (No downsampling) 4xMSAA+4xTrSSAA+FXAA http://i2.minus.com/iuP7qWczQoVHP.png
Many of these comparisons may seem irrelevant. But it shows that FXAA is not so bad at high resolutions and can even look better IQ wise than SGSSAA, the current holy grail on PC depending on the game.
Also: TMAA has not been confirmed to be Transparency Anti Aliasing has it?
I'm pretty sure it's not. If it was, it would be called something like TrMAA or TrSSAA(Or TrSGSSSAA if you want to use the correct naming) like it is on PC would it not?
Or perhaps it is, and the T has a double meaning for Transparency and Temporal Multi sampling Anti Aliasing
And please don't forget, that Killzone Shadow Fall was ORIGINALLY shown with nothing BUT FXAA (From E3 onward). Until recently when they've implemented TMAA underneath it.
http://i6.minus.com/ibjng3oNOeWpuo.png
Dictator93
Member
If you are forcing downsampling and OGSSAA then you can scarcely comment on the quality of FXAA as a PPAA. As you do in all your examples above.
The way FXAA is commonly used is as the ONLY AA.
Obviously the temporal component from TMAA will change some of our understandings of its image quality, but FXAA suffers endemically from many problems and arguably ruins the image quality more than it helps in many scenarios.
The TMAA this game and many sony titles will be using will probably not be that TMAA. That TMAA requires multisampling of transparencies, which is rather expensive for hardware.
Rather, it will most likely be a temporal AA.
The way FXAA is commonly used is as the ONLY AA.
Obviously the temporal component from TMAA will change some of our understandings of its image quality, but FXAA suffers endemically from many problems and arguably ruins the image quality more than it helps in many scenarios.
The TMAA this game and many sony titles will be using will probably not be that TMAA. That TMAA requires multisampling of transparencies, which is rather expensive for hardware.
Rather, it will most likely be a temporal AA.
BONKERS
Member
Except that FXAA at high resolutions works VERY WELL.
And when you combine that with downsampling it works even better.
And that's EXACTLY what I was showing.
That it doesn't harm IQ at high resolutions and that it works well at high resolutions.
In Binary Domain 4xMSAA+4xTrSSAA+FXAA works better at AA'ing the image in motion than 4xSGSSAA does. Which is a high quality AA method.
Everyone is crapping about how FXAA is so bad, when in fact it isn't at high resolutions. It's equally on par with SMAA 1x with less of the performance hit. SMAA just isn't worth it for the performance hit, and it does absolutely nothing for specular aliasing.
And when you combine that with downsampling it works even better.
And that's EXACTLY what I was showing.
That it doesn't harm IQ at high resolutions and that it works well at high resolutions.
In Binary Domain 4xMSAA+4xTrSSAA+FXAA works better at AA'ing the image in motion than 4xSGSSAA does. Which is a high quality AA method.
Everyone is crapping about how FXAA is so bad, when in fact it isn't at high resolutions. It's equally on par with SMAA 1x with less of the performance hit. SMAA just isn't worth it for the performance hit, and it does absolutely nothing for specular aliasing.
I sear I see no difference between these pics...at least not enough to say one is crap and the other is the best thing ever
Dictator93
Member
At native non-downsampled Res SMAA is objectively better in almost every single coverage category whilst not unsharpening. That is my argument. Obviously it costs more in performance.
Most people dislike FXAA because it is used as the ONLY AA at native RES. Also, FXAA does nothing to help against specular aliasing. It just decreases the brightness of specular areas.
Your argument is probably correct about FXAA being good when a game already has tons of other AA. But that argument is tangential to people's complaints about FXAA in this thread.
TyphoonStruggle
Member
this.
the jacket's collar button (flap thingy) is a good example of the FXAA induced blurring, but this pic is largely void of the detail we actually see in modern games.
I'm really curious to see how TMAA will evolve over the course of this gen. I know RAD developed a custom specular AA solution for The Order that could wind up incorporated into TMAA. If all of Sony's first party devs work with it and it eventually gets released to third parties like MLAA was, it could become standard on PS4 games if it's low impact enough.
Always-honest
Banned
Clean your glasses and stop thinking a youtube vid is exactly what the game looks like.
Then read about depth of field, motion blur, etc.
Or, don't just shout silly stuff.
Globalisateur
Banned
It would. It is called SMAA 1tx (t for temporal) and is used in Ryse with spectacular results. Lots of people found AA solution in Ryse the most impressive they have seen on consoles. Me included.
You can also combine SMAA 1tx with 4xMSAA, it is called SMAA 4x.
Morphological antialiasings with/without temporal part is the future of AA in consoles. Uncharted 3, The Last of us, Ryse and AC4 (next gen), all those games use some form of morphological AA which don't blur anymore the textures & assets.
Please devs, don't blur your assets/textures and let Quincunx (KZ2 & GT6) and FXAA (Knack & KZSF) blurring solutions die already!!
cobragt4001
Banned
In all honesty kz sf is so jaggy I assumed it had no AA.
Knack doesn't use FXAA and KZSF only uses it in MP. It uses TSSAA in SP and I think that'll be more common from here on out.
Check the sharpness on your TV. It has aliasing on high contrast edges, which is expected with pure post process AA, but for the most part it's very clean.
Similar threads
- Poll