Thanks for your reply, things are a lot clearer (and brighter :-)
now

Hughes, B. wrote:

> "Bill Hails" <bil### [at] europeyahoo-inccom> wrote in message
> news:3f85d88c@news.povray.org...
>>
>> There's a couple of things I'm not sure about with respect to looks_like.
>>
>> Firstly there are two locations: the location of the light source and the
>> location of the object. I'm not sure if the light source gets transposed,
>> or if it only appears to shine through the object.
>>
>> Secondly, what's the difference between looks_like and just putting a
>> light source at the centre of an object and making the object no_shadow?
> 
> Ack! I sure can foul up when I jump to quickly to answer things like this.
> Don't know why my memory fails so badly sometimes. Unless you can't guess,
> I had already posted an incorrect reply here and then cancelled it.
> 
> Let me see if I can manage to do better this time. It does indeed move the
> object to the light's position.
> 
> Other than that, no, it doesn't shine light through it as though it were a
> hole in an otherwise solid universe. Only allows light to pass without any
> shadowing attached. What I mean by this, there isn't any projected light
> through the looks_like object in the sense that if it were offset from the
> light source location light would not beam outward from the object.
> 
> projected_through could help to pipe the light through an object if you
> wanted the light shining from elsewhere but through the object.  Either
> way you lose any filtered or transmitted coloring due to lack of shadow.
> 
> It's essentially what no_shadow does, just tied to the light more directly
> than if were by a union instead.
> 
> Sorry for the mistake before, if anyone saw that too.  :-X  Again, if I'm
> wrong in any way about the above answer maybe the POV-gods will take pity
> on
> me.  :-)
> 
> Bob H.

-- 
Bill Hails

Post a reply to this message