"Christopher James Huff" <chr### [at] maccom> wrote in message
news:chr### [at] netplexaussieorg...
> In article <3dac17d4$1@news.povray.org>,
>  "hughes, b." <omn### [at] charternet> wrote:
>
> > I guess if negative lights were to do as expected of such a thing,
> > though, then they'd actually illuminate shadows, or be a anti-shadow.
>
> Why? Ordinary lights don't darken shadows, they just fail to illuminate
> them.

I'd say a logical anti-light would illuminate the shadow regions, behaving
exactly opposite of a regular light. I think know what you're saying though,
that non-light doesn't mean illumination of any sort.

> > But as they are now it does subtract positive color lights and
> > ambience from the scene, except for strange artifacts left in the
> > shadow regions I guess.
>
> What artifacts? Shadowed areas are shadowed from the "antilight" just as
> they are from light.

I'll post an example of what I see as a problem with shadows when a pair of
lights, one positive color, other negative color, are shone upon an object
and the shadow created by that. See p.b.i., if you will, please.

Post a reply to this message