Nieminen Mika wrote:

> Mike <Ama### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> : Unfortunately is seemed to prove that in certain areas media falls
> : short.
>
>   Atmosphere seems to be much better than media.
>   I think it would be a very good idea to support atmosphere again, not as
> a substitute of the atmospheric media, but as an alternative.
>   Does anyone else agree with this? Perhaps povteam will listen to the
> crowd...

I never got around to using atmospheric media and know little of it's
capabilities. Perhaps a better request would be to incorporate
different sampling methods into the media feature itself. As has been
mentioned Chris Young choose the monte carlo version of sampling
but there are other methods available. I know too little to comment
more, but it seems possible the feature can be added on to, to increase
it's effectiveness.

--
Ken Tyler

tyl### [at] pacbellnet

Post a reply to this message