AGG第四十四课渲染问题：绘制较宽轮廓和尖锐边缘

提供展示代码：

成都创新互联公司，为您提供成都网站建设公司、成都网站制作公司、网站营销推广、网站开发设计，对服务成都高空作业车租赁等多个行业拥有丰富的网站建设及推广经验。成都创新互联公司网站建设公司成立于2013年,提供专业网站制作报价服务,我们深知市场的竞争激烈，认真对待每位客户，为客户提供赏心悦目的作品。 与客户共同发展进步，是我们永远的责任！

      agg::rendering_buffer &rbuf = rbuf_window();
      agg::pixfmt_bgr24 pixf(rbuf);

      typedef agg::renderer_base renderer_base_type;
      renderer_base_type renb(pixf);

      typedef agg::renderer_scanline_aa_solid renderder_scanline_type;
      renderder_scanline_type rensl(renb);

      agg::rasterizer_scanline_aa<> ras;
      agg::scanline_u8 sl;
      ras.reset();

      double x[4];
      double y[4];
      double h =100.33;

      x[0] = 10;  y[0] = 10;
      x[1] = 100; y[1] = 10;
      x[2] = 100; y[2] = y[0]+h;
      x[3] = 10;  y[3] = y[0]+h;

      agg::path_storage ps;
      ps.move_to(x[0],y[0]);
      ps.line_to(x[1],y[1]);
      ps.line_to(x[2],y[2]);
      ps.line_to(x[3],y[3]);
      ps.close_polygon();
      ras.add_path(ps);
      agg::render_scanlines_aa_solid(ras,sl,renb,agg::rgba8(255, 0, 0));
      ps.remove_all();
      ras.reset();
      ps.move_to(x[0]+10,y[0]+h);
      ps.line_to(x[1]+10,y[1]+h);
      ps.line_to(x[2]+10,y[2]+h);
      ps.line_to(x[3]+10,y[3]+h);
      ps.close_polygon();
      ras.add_path(ps);

      agg::render_scanlines_aa_solid(ras,sl,renb,agg::rgba8(255, 0, 0));

非常明显的看出两个矩形相邻的边界上出现一条浅浅的白边。

邮件质疑：

As you can see there is a brighter line between the two rectangles. I

know where it is from - this is a result of alpha blending of two

partially covered scanlines. And this is a problem form me.

Do you have any idea how to get rid of this line? I mean how to make

it in the same color as the rectangles. My application draws metafiles

and sometimes there are such shapes in them and I get ugly banded

drawings... Do you have any ideas?

如下是作者的解释：

 it's a well known problem that can't be eliminated easily. It exists in

all SVG engies and appears as thin "web" upon the p_w_picpath, when you draw adjacent

shapes:http://www.antigrain.com/svg/index.htmlSay, initially you have color (0,0,0). Then you draw a white pixel on it with

0.5 opacity (which is equivalent 0.5 of pixel coverage). You will have

(0.5,0.5,0.5) which is correct. Then you draw another pixel upon it, also with

opacity=0.5. According to the color blending rules you will have

(0.75,0.75,0.75), not (1,1,1). This is what happens when you draw your

rectrangles.

The problem can't be easily solved. In the SVG example I use conv_contour to

dilate all polygons. But this solution isn't perfect and kinda unfair.

But you can't render a multicolor scene in such a way. It's possible only in

Macromedia Flash, but it requires not only another rasterization algorithm, but

also changing the whole data model. Your data shall be represented not as a set

of polygons, but as a set of edges with attributes - color on the left and

color on the right.

> Say, initially you have color (0,0,0). Then you draw a white pixel on it with

> 0.5 opacity (which is equivalent 0.5 of pixel coverage). You will have

> (0.5,0.5,0.5) which is correct. Then you draw another pixel upon it, also with

> opacity=0.5. According to the color blending rules you will have

> (0.75,0.75,0.75), not (1,1,1). This is what happens when you draw your

> rectrangles.

This is the color from the original post:

> >         ren_aa.color(agg::rgba(0.4, 0.3, 0.2, 1.0));

The opacity of the color is 1.0, not 0.5. So what Maxim tried to say is I 

guess something like this: "Then you draw a white pixel on it with 0.5 

pixel coverage (which is equivalent to 0.5 opacity)."

Now, forgive me for my ignorance if this is trivial, I really haven't had 

to think about this particular problem, but here's an idea: suppose you 

are doing a flash-like multicolor fill where you know that no polygon 

overlaps another (triangulation, tesselation, whatever). Can the blending 

rule in AGG be changed so that the alpha channel is not interpreted as a 

genuine alpha, but as a coverage percentage instead? So that for example 

in this particular case 0.5+0.5 would be 1.0? This wouldn't work if you 

also want alpha, but the presumption here is that you really don't need it.

> Now, forgive me for my ignorance if this is trivial, I really haven't had 

> to think about this particular problem, but here's an idea: suppose you 

> are doing a flash-like multicolor fill where you know that no polygon 

> overlaps another (triangulation, tesselation, whatever). Can the blending 

> rule in AGG be changed so that the alpha channel is not interpreted as a 

> genuine alpha, but as a coverage percentage instead? So that for example 

> in this particular case 0.5+0.5 would be 1.0? This wouldn't work if you 

> also want alpha, but the presumption here is that you really don't need it.

Actually, that's an idea, I'm not sure it's doable, but it's seems to be. One

pixel can be overlapped by many polygons even if the polygons themselves do not

overlap. 

http://antigrain.com/stuff/multipoly_cover.gif - the central pixel is covered

by 6 triangles. It means that there are 6 different cover values and 6 colors.

And the resulting color must be calculated as the weigted average, where weight

is coverage. But we should keep a whole list of coverage values for each pixel!

Another solution is to use the alpha channel for coverage values. Suppose we

have not RGBA, but RGBC color space. Initially all cover values are 0. At a

time we always operate with 2 colors and two coverage values. We accumulate the

coverage values (with clipping at 1.0) and calculate the resulting color as the

weighted average of 2 colors/covers. It looks very familiar, and remainds me

the formulae for alpha blending in plain (non-premultiplied) color space.

> And the resulting color must be calculated as the weigted average, where weight

> is coverage. But we should keep a whole list of coverage values for each pixel!

Assume for example that you have calculated values

  nom = (w1*a1+w2*a2+w3*a3)/(w1+w2+w3)   (the weighted mean so far)

  den = w1+w2+w3                         (the sum of weights so far)

Then you can calculate new values

  nom = (nom*den + w4*a4)/(den+w4)

  den += w4

Expanding those formulas you will get the correct results. That is, you do 

not need to keep a record of all the colors in order to calculate an 

update to the weighted mean, the mean so far plus the weight (kept in 

alpha) is sufficient.

摘自：http://sourceforge.net/p/vector-agg/mailman/vector-agg-general/?viewmonth=200504