In article <web.3fc64abeb2b1540c240f43310@news.povray.org>,
 "incognito" <nomail@nomail> wrote:

> The interesting thing is I asked the prof if he wanted us to have pure
> radiosity or radiosity with conventional light sources a week ago and he
> replied he wanted pure radiosity with one object generating light (a sun)
> and also a light source that would act as the sky...so that is what I have
> been trying to do.

You sure he said to do that? The usual arrangement has things the other 
way around. Light sources, even area lights, are very bad at doing 
diffuse light coming from large areas, such as a sky. Radiosity is very 
bad at doing light coming from more or less a single point. Radiosity 
for the sky and an area light for the sun would make much more sense. 
And if he said to use a light source, it wasn't pure radiosity.


> So far, I believe I have the sky ok but not sure if the
> object light is working correctly (i.e. doesn't seem like the objects
> nearer to the sun object are lit up any more than those further away (which
> I take to be how it *should* work).

Try removing all light sources...your radiosity lighting may simply be 
too dim.


> From what you are saying below, sounds like I do not need to set the diffuse
> vals of the other objects (just ambient to 0 and translate x), am I
> understanding that correctly?

You only need to adjust the diffuse value if the default of 0.6 doesn't 
suit your needs. I generally set the default ambient to 0 and the 
default diffuse to 1 (and put a dim, shadowless light at the camera 
position to fill in shadows).

-- 
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message