0

I'm wondering which one of these two sentences is correct? And if they both are correct, then what's the difference between them?

  • For displacement maps we use 32 bit depth images in order to avoid render artifacts which might occur if we used lower bit depth instead.
  • For displacement maps we use 32 bit depth images in order to avoid
    render artifacts which might occur if we have used lower bit depth
    instead.
Improve this question
4
  • If you're going to use a Perfect form (my advice being not to), it would have to be ...which might occur if we had used [blah blah]. Or more properly, ...which might have occurred if we had used [blah blah] (which I hope shows why you should avoid Perfect forms unless you need them! :)
    – FumbleFingers
    Sep 26, 2019 at 15:32
  • ...strictly speaking you should probably use a subjunctive for the "irrealis, counterfactual" possibility: which might occur if we were to use / were to have used [blah blah]. But I'd suggest you just keep it simple with ...which might occur with lower bit depth (forget the superfluous word instead).
    – FumbleFingers
    Sep 26, 2019 at 15:36
  • So the present perfect in not applicable here. I'm wondering how the meaning would change with the past perfect which might have occurred if we had used. Can you provide an elaborate answer in the answer section and will accept it as the best. Thanks.
    – blablaalb
    Sep 26, 2019 at 15:38
  • Present Perfect is completely wrong for your context. It's okay in something like If I have offended you then I apologize, where the speaker doesn't know whether the situation being referred to occurred or not. But in your context the speaker knows for sure that they didn't use lower bit depth. So the reference is one of irrealis, and I've just discovered from that Wikipedia link that Every language has a formula for the "unreal", so hopefully that makes sense to you.
    – FumbleFingers
    Sep 26, 2019 at 15:45

0

Reset to default

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .