Hugo Asm <hua### [at] post3teledk> wrote:
> I was thinking about averaging normals scaled very BIG, and that looks
> horrible. It even seems slower than my method unless I use .. only 10
> normals, and that looks plain wrong.

  In my experience scaling the normals big gives you a very smooth result,
which scaling the very small gives you a very grainy result. Personally
I like more the smooth one.
  Naturally you need a rather high amount of samples in order to get a
good-looking result with normals scaled big. When scaled small, the result
looks grainy no matter how many samples you use (even though a larger
amount of samples still gives a visually better result).
  It really depends on how you like grainy reflections. I usually don't
like them (unless it's a very rough surface where you are expecting a
grainy reflection).

  In any case, you can get both worlds with the same trick, just changing
one number.

-- 
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}//  - Warp -

Post a reply to this message