"Jeremy M. Praay" <jer### [at] questsoftwarecom> wrote in message
news:4161a5f3$1@news.povray.org...
> "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message
news:41619798@news.povray.org...

> >   Any idea what sort of time this would take with bog-standard rad
> > settings for an outside sunny daytime scene?
> >
> >   Times three?
> >
>
> Try it and see? ;-)

   Heh, I did, and worked out that it might be x3-ish after cancelling
it, but think it's more likely that it could be x4. If so, that's ok,
I still have time.


>
> I've done some outdoor radiosity scenes with very, very low
radiosity
> settings.  If you set count to something like 20, set error_bound
high
> (1.0), and set recursion limit to 1, your results may still look
pretty
> good, and I doubt that it would significantly affect your render
time.
> However, it very much depends on your scene.  For bright sunny
outdoor
> scenes, you can sometimes get away with bad radiosity as long as
you're not
> trying to show any deep shadow areas (like the side of a nearby
house or
> something).  I used really low settings in Radio Graves (similar to
what's
> described above) and Gilles mentions using really low settings for
his The
> Darker Side of Trees scene.

  Thank you Jeremy, you are a ray of sunshine! I'll give it a quick go
and see what happens...

>
> Assuming you're like me and you have a job, you can render from 11pm
until
> 6pm the next day (19 hrs) and never notice that you're missing your
> computer.  That should be enough time to gather if your render is
going to
> take significantly longer and if it's going to look any better or
worse
> (even if only half done or less).  But maybe I'm just stating the
obvious
> again.

    Well, seriously, this has been a concern as I need to access this
computer, so timing is fairly crucial for me, but I think I have it
covered. Hopefully. ;)

>
> I figured your scene was going to have ultra-high radiosity, a
bazillian
> photons, super-fine focal blur, fifty 100x100 area lights, and
include all
> types of media, with all objects being either spline-based CSG or
> iso-surfaces with complex difference operations.  ;-)  (Did I miss
> anything?)

  LOL! No, but I haven't done any of that! I'll just stick to what I'm
doing I think, with a little splash of rad added if possible...

  Later mate, and good luck to you and all the others. :)

   Thanks for the input.

     ~Steve~


>
> -- 
> Jeremy
> www.beantoad.com
>
>