I'm not an expert but I would lower your count by a lot. I saw no 
visible difference in my POVCOMP entry when I lowered it from 1200 to 
about 50, but it cut my time exponentially.

~Mike

stm31415 wrote:
> After a couple of IRTC submissions that used radiosity, and then getting
> comments suggesting I should try using radiosity, I mean to get it right
> this time. I have been using two-pass radiosity. I will post the image on
> P.B.I.
> Here is my problem. If I use a lower-quality first pass (count 500
> error_bound .4 at 100*60) My lighting is just as flat on the second pass as
> it always was. So now I am trying to use a 500*300 with the following
> settings:
> 
> 
>   radiosity {
>         #if (pass1)
>          pretrace_start .04
>           pretrace_end   .01
>          error_bound .1
>          minimum_reuse .0025
>          nearest_count 20
>          count 1200
>          recursion_limit 5
>          brightness 1
>          max_sample 2
>          low_error_factor 1
>          adc_bailout 0.01/20
>          save_file "radios"
>         #else
> 
>      pretrace_start 1
>       pretrace_end   1
>       count 1200
>       recursion_limit 5
>       low_error_factor .5
>       gray_threshold 0.0
>       brightness 1.25
>       error_bound .8
>       minimum_reuse .0025
>       nearest_count 20
>       low_error_factor 1
>       adc_bailout 0.01/20
>       load_file "radios"
>       always_sample off
>       max_sample 1
>      #end
>   }
> 
> but this, even with the simplified first pass scene, will take over 11 days
> to render! By the time I get the second pass done, I'll have run out of
> time. Have I forgotten something, or does a good render just take this
> long? It seems like I have seen high quality images that did not take quite
> so long.
> 
> Also, I am having trouble with the smoothed second pass. It seems to lose a
> lot of detail in small areas (see the ceiling in the posted image)
> 
> I have read the docs several times though, as well as Tim Nikias' two-pass
> radiosity experiments, but I'm still not quite getting that clean, crisp,
> complex shadowed look.
> 
> Thank you for any advice you can give.
> 
> -S
> 5TF!
> 
>

Post a reply to this message