Am 16.09.2014 22:11, schrieb And:
> "jhu" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>> "And" <49341109@ntnu.edu.tw> wrote:
>>> If photorealistic is important to you, I suggest that researching the knowledge
>>> on physical based lighting. It has some concepts.
>>
>> Can use Uberpov's no cache stochastic rendering.
>
> Is there any difference between no cache result and typical radiosity even with
> very small error_bound?

The short answer is "yes".

The somewhat longer answer begins with, "that certainly depends on your 
scene."

One thing that no_cache does is make the scene grainy (but 
"anti-aliasing" mode 3 can be used to good effect to counter this effect 
as much as desired, and I actually like it because it gives the image a 
more lively appearance.)

What you will /not/ have with no_cache is any type of splotchy 
artifacts; for instance, radiosity scenes with small detail on otherwise 
flat surfaces tend to have bright blotches in the crevices, which are 
very difficult to counteract with radiosity settings. Not so with 
no_cache: This rendering mode is true to the smallest detail (provided 
you throw enough computing time at it, otherwise the details may drown 
in random noise).

Post a reply to this message