SweetFX SMAA

Hello.
Basically I thought this should be here rather than issues because it is more of a question.

I'm really just wondering the optimal way to set up SMAA. I don't quite know how to use the prediction settings and some clarification would be nice.

So here I have SMAA Ultra:
#define fSMAAThreshold 0.05
#define iSMAAMaxSearchSteps 32(or 64)
#define iSMAAMaxSearchStepsDiag 16
#define iSMAACornerRounding 25(or 50)
#define iSMAAEdgeDetectionMode 2

I've seen the values higher but that's generally it.
Now with the Prediction settings I have no clue what they should be for the best quality.
Should I be using Detection Mode 1,2 or 3 with prediction?
What should the Prediction Threshold, Scale, and Strength be?

I'm looking for what would be considered "Ultra" for the prediction as well.

Thanks for your time.

I'm no expert but from the description in the shader file the threshold value at values below 0.1 can introduce false edges, which I think means it wrongly detects more edges with aliasing than there is and tries to fix them, perhaps affecting overall visual quality or maybe just decreases performance.

The max search step option(s) is probably where you'll see most of the difference in quality, personally I maxed them out but for performance reasons the default values of SweetFx 2.0 are probably more than enough.
(Interestingly search steps diagonal has a max of 16 according to SweetFx 2.0 but in MasterEffect the max is reported as 32)

Corner rounding further helps removing aliasing but it will affect HUD elements more (and text in particular) so I keep it at 0 (Default of SweetFx 2.0)

Edge Detect mode I would use 2 on with prediction enabled which additionally uses the depth buffer, from what I recently read on these forums if you use a value of 3 it uses the depth buffer only which might be cleaner but could miss a few objects and if you use a value of 3 with prediction it would use the depth buffer twice for no improvement in quality but there will be a increased performance hit.

The threshold value for prediction as it uses the depth buffer should be possible to put at a very low value such as 0.001 I think was the value mentioned in the post explaining that, also found on these forums somewhere.


Also ReShade supports hot swapping shader settings changes so what I would do is take a game and put it in windowed or borderless mode with ReShade and SweetFx injected, make sure SMAA and nothing but SMAA is enabled and then you just alter the values and perhaps capture screenshots for comparison purposes.
(With for example The Evil Within there's a clear difference between corner rounding at 0 and corner rounding at 100 or even just 10 so with a bit of time and some tweaking it should be fully possible to find values that are ideal for your own preferences and a balance between visual quality and performance.)

(Also as I understood it for ReShade 0.16.0 or rather SweetFx 2.0 preview 8 you need to enable the depth "effect" in the settings or it won't use the depth buffer at all which means depth edge detection and prediction won't be working.)

Personally I use these values:

(Again though I doubt you need to max the search step settings but ReShade or rather SMAA has little to no performance impact from my own testing but with different GPU models it could be different and of course in different games it will also have different effects.)


EDIT: Oh and if you kill the depth buffer detection/hooking (Playing online or using MSAA or forced driver level AA.) or if the game doesn't have correct depth buffer hooking (Such as it being upside down or only partial.) then of course the depth edge detection and prediction will be affected.
(The key in the settings for ReShade / SweetFx to show the depth buffer can be used to quickly check this, I have it bound to F11 myself but I forgot what the default was though it might have been F11.)

Thanks JBeckman, I use ultra SMAA settings!

I was digging in the current SMAA.h file and I saw that it supports modern SMAA modes, like SMAA T2X, even with instructions how to use it, but is too technical for me. Is there any chance to use it now, or would require more work from Crosire? or it's impossible because it has to be implemented by the game developer?

I think newest AA modes would be a fantastic addition to Reshade, games like Ryse, Advanced Warfare or Infamous use it with very good results.

HeLL wrote: Thanks JBeckman, I use ultra SMAA settings!

I was digging in the current SMAA.h file and I saw that it supports modern SMAA modes, like SMAA T2X, even with instructions how to use it, but is too technical for me. Is there any chance to use it now, or would require more work from Crosire? or it's impossible because it has to be implemented by the game developer?

I think newest AA modes would be a fantastic addition to Reshade, games like Ryse, Advanced Warfare or Infamous use it with very good results.

they need a method for collecting the data from previous frames without putting more compile time that already exist.With that being said reshade is gonna need to work with the msaa fully to work as you need msaa x2 or x4 working to use the higher up smaa settings these would need to be tailored to individual games as there would be ghosting to deal with alien isolation is a good example of this the game has ghosting with smaa t2x on at least what i could see , even crysis 3 using smaa x4 has ghosting so its not 100% perfect by any means this will also vary from game to game and im sure gpu drivers will play a little role into it as well.If you want a more "official" answer corsair or any of the guys putting out shaders im sure would be glad to reply back with a better response then what i could give

The max search step option(s) is probably where you'll see most of the difference in quality

I see almost zero differences between default and maxed out SMAA SEARCH_STEPS settings.
default 16/6 i.imgur.com/5jhrXLW.jpg
maxed 98/16 i.imgur.com/tNIxT9Z.jpg

Is it normal?

I notice about zero difference too.

I notice quite a difference. Look at the curbs, for one.

Cloudbill wrote: I notice quite a difference. Look at the curbs, for one.

Actually, there isn't

Use a image diff program to compare, like Guiffy:



The differences here are all movement between the shots, the bushes, cars and character. There's no difference on the curbs, or anything else I can see. But, it's not the ideal shot to compare.

Ideally you want to pause the game, take a shot, edit the values and take another shot. Reshade automatically reloads settings after a second when you change settings, so no need to unpause or reload the game.

I'd be curious to see someone put together a collection of shots showing differences at different SMAA setting levels, and maybe some other shaders, but you absolutely need an identical static image for before and after when comparing.

Martigen wrote: Ideally you want to pause the game, take a shot, edit the values and take another shot. Reshade automatically reloads settings after a second when you change settings, so no need to unpause or reload the game.

I tried to do this, but it seems that in pause mode the game shows a static picture but not a paused 3D image. In my case Reshade refuses to be updated in this mode.

/sorry for my English guys!

Not really sure if the current default settings are based on the Ultra preset of the original SMAA shader but If you haven't customized the settings from those defaults besides the two for search steps you could further try to enable corner rounding from it's default value of 0 to something like 50 (I forgot what the actual value for the Ultra preset was in the original shader.) and it should show a more noticeable difference but it will affect text more which going by the shader file comments this is why it's set to 0 instead.
(The main game where I tested this was with The Evil Within which shows a pretty noticeable difference directly in the main menu screen since it's in 3D.)

Besides that having a working depth buffer hook will also have a effect if predication is enabled which in GTA V's case it seems to be a bit problematic so you probably won't get the full benefit from that in that particular game or stuff like MMO's.


EDIT: Corner rounding 0
postimg.org/image/qjooiio67/

And 100
postimg.org/image/gxv427x0f/

(Varies a bit from game to game but it does get a bit more difficult to read a lot of text when it's blurred like this even if it might look minor at first.)

JBeckman wrote: Not really sure if the current default settings are based on the Ultra preset of the original SMAA shader but If you haven't customized the settings from those defaults besides the two for search steps you could further try to enable corner rounding from it's default value of 0 to something like 50 (I forgot what the actual value for the Ultra preset was in the original shader.) and it should show a more noticeable difference but it will affect text more which going by the shader file comments this is why it's set to 0 instead.
(The main game where I tested this was with The Evil Within which shows a pretty noticeable difference directly in the main menu screen since it's in 3D.)

Besides that having a working depth buffer hook will also have a effect if predication is enabled which in GTA V's case it seems to be a bit problematic so you probably won't get the full benefit from that in that particular game or stuff like MMO's.


EDIT: Corner rounding 0
postimg.org/image/qjooiio67/

And 100
postimg.org/image/gxv427x0f/

(Varies a bit from game to game but it does get a bit more difficult to read a lot of text when it's blurred like this even if it might look minor at first.)

25 is default for smaa at ultra , 50 on some games is where i leave it. If we get HUD/UI out of the post we can leave it at 100

Yeah if Crosire and team can get the HUD / UI elements excluded that would be excellent so I'm really looking forward to hearing how that goes but it's probably going to be similar to the situation with the depth buffer where it's a bit tricky and results can vary from game to game, at least initially but we'll see.

NotSoSweet wrote:

The max search step option(s) is probably where you'll see most of the difference in quality

I see almost zero differences between default and maxed out SMAA SEARCH_STEPS settings.
default 16/6 i.imgur.com/5jhrXLW.jpg
maxed 98/16 i.imgur.com/tNIxT9Z.jpg

Is it normal?

turn on the debug setting either 1/2/5 this helps you determine edge detection without picking up edges you dont want those do do something search_steps can be a max of 112 and search_diag can be 20 , unless cj has changed this somehow thats what the white papers state and to me from using this i have seen a change its subtle setting corner rounding to 50 is helpful if you can get past some blury text which in some games really isnt a problem

Is there a difference ( graphic, i mean ) between SweetFX 1.5.1 and ReShade 0.17.1 Public Beta with SweetFX 2.0 Beta 8 ??

Kleio420 wrote: turn on the debug setting either 1/2/5 this helps you determine edge detection without picking up edges you dont want those do do something search_steps can be a max of 112 and search_diag can be 20 , unless cj has changed this somehow thats what the white papers state and to me from using this i have seen a change its subtle setting corner rounding to 50 is helpful if you can get past some blury text which in some games really isnt a problem

Damn i think, i'm too dumb for this explanation.
Okay... So basically there is no difference between SEARCH_STEPS with SMAA_CORNER_ROUNDING 0? Did i get it right?



bluex

As i can see the SweetFX is still in beta 8 and with old files from version 8.

NotSoSweet wrote:

Kleio420 wrote: turn on the debug setting either 1/2/5 this helps you determine edge detection without picking up edges you dont want those do do something search_steps can be a max of 112 and search_diag can be 20 , unless cj has changed this somehow thats what the white papers state and to me from using this i have seen a change its subtle setting corner rounding to 50 is helpful if you can get past some blury text which in some games really isnt a problem

Damn i think, i'm too dumb for this explanation.
Okay... So basically there is no difference between SEARCH_STEPS with SMAA_CORNER_ROUNDING 0? Did i get it right?



bluex

As i can see the SweetFX is still in beta 8 and with old files from version 8.

no there is a huge difference but its really only seen on txt , putting the rounding up helps detect and make smoother lines at least from how what im seeing. Keep in mind that if i read the sheet correctly max search_steps if its 32 its really 64 it doubles on this number so 112 is 224 this on lower end systems is gonna cost more its also stated it doesn't necessarily mean better AA lines sometimes higher settings look better on one game but another game lower settings work just fine the radius can go as low as 0.01 but i normally keep it at 0.05-0.10 combined with color+depth detection you dont really need a high radius number. note tho 0.20 is usually more effective for any temporal smaa effect like tx2 or smaax4 pretty sure there is one more version of this that only uses msaa x2 that is a different supersampling method then tx2 but cant think of the name atm. Below are settings i use generally normally you want to use luma detection


#define SMAA_THRESHOLD 0.05 //[0.05 to 0.20]
#define SMAA_MAX_SEARCH_STEPS 112 //[0 to 98]
#define SMAA_MAX_SEARCH_STEPS_DIAG 20 //[0 to 16]
#define SMAA_CORNER_ROUNDING 50 //[0 to 100]

// -- Advanced SMAA settings --
#define SMAA_EDGE_DETECTION 1 //[1|2|3] 1 = Luma edge detection, 2 = Color edge detection, 3 = Depth edge detection
#define SMAA_DIRECTX9_LINEAR_BLEND 0 //[0 or 1]

// -- SMAA Predication settings --
#define SMAA_PREDICATION 1 //[0 or 1]
#define SMAA_PREDICATION_THRESHOLD 0.001
#define SMAA_PREDICATION_SCALE 0.6
#define SMAA_PREDICATION_STRENGTH 0.4

Kleio420 wrote:

NotSoSweet wrote:

Kleio420 wrote: turn on the debug setting either 1/2/5 this helps you determine edge detection without picking up edges you dont want those do do something search_steps can be a max of 112 and search_diag can be 20 , unless cj has changed this somehow thats what the white papers state and to me from using this i have seen a change its subtle setting corner rounding to 50 is helpful if you can get past some blury text which in some games really isnt a problem

Damn i think, i'm too dumb for this explanation.
Okay... So basically there is no difference between SEARCH_STEPS with SMAA_CORNER_ROUNDING 0? Did i get it right?



bluex


As i can see the SweetFX is still in beta 8 and with old files from version 8.

no there is a huge difference but its really only seen on txt , putting the rounding up helps detect and make smoother lines at least from how what im seeing. Keep in mind that if i read the sheet correctly max search_steps if its 32 its really 64 it doubles on this number so 112 is 224 this on lower end systems is gonna cost more its also stated it doesn't necessarily mean better AA lines sometimes higher settings look better on one game but another game lower settings work just fine the radius can go as low as 0.01 but i normally keep it at 0.05-0.10 combined with color+depth detection you dont really need a high radius number. note tho 0.20 is usually more effective for any temporal smaa effect like tx2 or smaax4 pretty sure there is one more version of this that only uses msaa x2 that is a different supersampling method then tx2 but cant think of the name atm. Below are settings i use generally normally you want to use luma detection


#define SMAA_THRESHOLD 0.05 //[0.05 to 0.20]
#define SMAA_MAX_SEARCH_STEPS 112 //[0 to 98]
#define SMAA_MAX_SEARCH_STEPS_DIAG 20 //[0 to 16]
#define SMAA_CORNER_ROUNDING 50 //[0 to 100]

// -- Advanced SMAA settings --
#define SMAA_EDGE_DETECTION 1 //[1|2|3] 1 = Luma edge detection, 2 = Color edge detection, 3 = Depth edge detection
#define SMAA_DIRECTX9_LINEAR_BLEND 0 //[0 or 1]

// -- SMAA Predication settings --
#define SMAA_PREDICATION 1 //[0 or 1]
#define SMAA_PREDICATION_THRESHOLD 0.001
#define SMAA_PREDICATION_SCALE 0.6
#define SMAA_PREDICATION_STRENGTH 0.4

Kleio420 , i didn't really understand you
Is it or not a difference between SweetFX 1.5.1 and ReShade 0.17.1 Public Beta with SweetFX 2.0 Beta 8 ??
Those values are for War Thunder, or for all the games ?

I can't answer but I know CeeJay said that he had updated SMAA to the latest SVN revision for ReShade 2.0 and that it was currently (At the time of that post at least.) missing a few optimizations so it could be a bit slower than SMAA in SweetFx 1.5.1 but I don't know if there's any image quality differences or additional features.

bluex wrote:

Kleio420 wrote:

NotSoSweet wrote:

Kleio420 wrote: turn on the debug setting either 1?

yea sweetfx 1.51 is faster then reshade is with smaa , but no you dont need to really understand those settings at all those are global config settings just play around with them see what looks better i never said those specific settings were for all games just that those could go higher then stated unless cj has capped them at a certain value.He is working on optimizing it more to be as quick is his goal he's stated several times on these forums.

Your question the smaa process in general speaking is no different from any sweetfx verion to even reshade its the exact same shader its either got optimizations put in or not on the current version of the shader they dont change how it works from one injector to another.

I can't use anymoreSweetFX, after the last update of War Thunder ( 1.70.1945.60 )

I can actually, but everything looks over over over saturated. I tried to remove the file SweetFX_Settings, only to test ...
Those oversaturated colors are still there, without this file inside the War Thunder folder
Anyone could help me, please ???
Thank you