I agree with Warp, since we are not only concerned with speed but the 
quality of the output. Being the last release build, 3.6 is the standard 
against which any changes should be measured.


"clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote in message 
news:web.49722d4ebea0b42dd3a05d570@news.povray.org...
> Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>>   Why is everyone comparing the radiosity of Beta 30 with the newest
>> radiosity version?
>>
>>   Unless I'm completely mistaken, the radiosity code in 3.7 beta
>> versions <= 30 was, by all intents and purposes, non-functional and
>> certainly not intended to be used for anything. The code was just
>> provisionally there to give *something* (rather than eg. just crashing
>> the program) but not as the intended functionality.
>>
>>   What people should compare against is the radiosity in 3.6.
>
> Unfortunately, from what I've seen in my test renders is that there is no 
> great
> difference in speed between 3.6 and 3.7.0.beta.29 (at least when comparing 
> pure
> CPU time). This is because the radiosity code wasn't so dysfunctional 
> after all
> - it was just broken, but that didn't influence speed much.
>
> So the drastic increase in reder time does worry me.
>
>

Post a reply to this message