In article <3ab9f02f@news.povray.org>, "Nekar Xenos" 
<vir### [at] iconcoza> wrote:

> If I understand it correctly, the purpose of radiosity is to 
> compensate for light scattered by rough surfaces. Normals, as I 
> understand don't do this right without radiosity which is why you 
> need to add radiosity.
> Therefore if you were to use isosurfaces or heightfields to make rough
> textures with a relatively low reflection level and a high maximum 
> iteration
> level, you wouldn't need to add radiosity.

I've experimented with something similar using blurred reflection. You 
don't need isosurfaces or blurred reflection, normals would work fine, 
but you will need hefty antialiasing settings. And it will be 
excruciatingly slow...
The reason radiosity exists as a separate feature is that it can be much 
faster and smoother that way, as well as easier to use. There are many 
optimizations that can be done with radiosity calculations but not 
blurred reflection calculations.

-- 
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/

<><

Post a reply to this message