The title of the Valve SIGGRAPH 2007 paper on signed distance fields (SDF) is important to pay attention to: "Improved Alpha-Tested Magnification of Vector Textures"...
Is it really that much better than just rotating bitmaps? The differences shouldn't be great. BTW, I think that unless you're doing shadows and outlines SDFs are mostly isomorphic to bitmaps. i.e. you can convert a bitmap pixel to a distance value.
-
-
SDFs are less blurry than bitmaps when transformed. While they don't retain full smoothness/"pointiness" of the shape, they can do sharp edges. The difference is that you compute the aa on the real pixel grid after tranform rather than before and then resampling due to transform.
-
Sure, but you can do that with regular antialiased bitmaps too. You just need to convert from pixel coverage to distance. It turns out that while not quite the same they’re highly correlated to within 5% (the formula is in WR actually, see distance_aa)
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.