"Gilles Tran" <gil### [at] agroparistechfr> wrote in message
news:471df388$1@news.povray.org...
>

> 471d0e43@news.povray.org...
> > delle <del### [at] ciaowebit> wrote:
> >> Rendering with LuxRender means simulating light according to physical
> >> equations, this produces realistic photographic quality images.
> >
> >  Fancy words, but what do they actually mean?
>
> Other unbiaised renderers have been available for a while now (Maxwell,
> Indigo, FryRender and the first two can be tested). I don't know how it
> works, but it's a definitely some fantastic CG technology. Slow like hell
> (like raytracing in the early 90s...), and still immature, but for
> architecture visualisation, it gives extremely impressive results if one
can
> afford the bugs and the render times. For instance, Maxwell has a feature
> where one can change the lighting setup *** after *** rendering so that
one
> can test various lighting situations in real time.
> That's really something worth investigating for POV-Ray 4. IMHO this is
> much, much more important than SDL.
>
> <rant>The lack of interest here is a little bit worrying: if we were back
in
> 1996 and Ryoychi Suzuki and Nathan Kopp were suddenly showing bizarre
stuff
> called "isosurfaces" and "photon mapping", I guess that people would start
> snarking instead of showing some basic curiosity :( </rant>
>
> G.
>
>
>

The fact that the luxrender2 is a "fork" of the rendered described in the
book Physically Based Rendering makes me confident that the POV-Ray
developers aren't being left in the dust. I've admitedly only read about 100
pages, but I've skimmed a lot of it just out of curiousity (without
retaining much). It seems to have some good stuff in it. Check out the
gallery of PBRT: http://www.pbrt.org/gallery.php for example, this one could
rock my socks off:

"render translucent objects with heterogeneous scattering properties"
http://www.pbrt.org/gallery/dragon_subsurf.png

Post a reply to this message