Hello,

I have been rendering radiosity images on clusters for a few weeks now. 
I am doing *absolutely nothing* to prevent/deal with the supposed
"artifacts" that distributed radiosity rendering creates.  I cannot see
any rendering artifacts.  Could someone please explain what these
artifacts would look like & possibly point them out in the following
images?  

http://homepages.ucalgary.ca/~psmacmur/images/poppy640.png
This was rendered with SMPOV in 16 horizonal strips (Tiled 1x16)

http://homepages.ucalgary.ca/~psmacmur/images/beanstalk_potted_500x700.png
This was rendered on several computers but i forget which or how many:

http://homepages.ucalgary.ca/~psmacmur/images/beanstalk_potted_filter_1500x2100.jpg
This hi-res version of the previous model was rendered in 4 horizontal
strips on SGIs using distribution/reassembly code based on Paul
Bourke's: 
http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/~pbourke/povray/parallel/ 

All use radiosity in conjunction with a very large dense area light.





> 

> wrote:
> > I can't prove anything but somehow I feel below can cause some kind of error
> > (crash, bad image, etc). I wonder about radiosity in animation. I have SCENE.POV
> > script with scene of animation with radiosity. Then I start two instances of
> > POV-Ray:
> > first: +KFF100 +EF50 +ISCENE.POV
> > second: +KFF100 +SF51 +ISCENE.POV
> > but during trace proces there is only one file SCENE.RCA. Is it good behavior ?
> > Both images are different - objects move. I don't use save/load feature of
> > radiosity but I can imagine somebody can. Shouldn't RCA file be named like
> > currently rendered image ? Of course I'm talking about 3.5.
> 
> Have anybody tested something similiar for OS on cluster of computers? with
> 3.5 or 3.1 ? I'm interested in results. Thanks.
> 
> ABX

Post a reply to this message