|
 |
I thought I will try also such a radiosity image, but it seems I can't get
the right parameters...
I rendered it in 2h ...
Peak memory was about 340MB...
Therefore I needed to lower the count to
I tried it with count=196 but my memory didn't agree with this idea ;)
Any ideas, how to tweak the rad-settings ?
Other comments ?
global_settings {
assumed_gamma 1.0
max_trace_level 48
adc_bailout 1/96
#if (Radiosity)
radiosity {
pretrace_start 0.02 // start pretrace at this size
pretrace_end 0.01 // end pretrace at this size
count 128 // higher -> higher quality (1..1600)
[35]
nearest_count 10 // higher -> higher quality (1..10) [5]
error_bound 0.05 // higher -> smoother, less accurate
[1.8]
recursion_limit 3 // how much interreflections are
calculated (1..5+) [3]
low_error_factor .5 // reduce error_bound during last
pretrace step
gray_threshold 0.0 // increase for weakening colors (0..1)
[0]
minimum_reuse 0.01 // reuse of old radiosity samples [0.015]
brightness 1 // brightness of radiosity effects (0..1)
[1]
// adc_bailout 0.01/2
normal on // take surface normals into account [off]
file://media on // take media into account [off]
file://save_file "file_name" // save radiosity data
file://load_file "file_name" // load saved radiosity data
file://always_sample off // turn sampling in final trace off
[on]
file://max_sample 1.0 // maximum brightness of samples
}
#end
}
--
Jan Walzer <jan### [at] lzer net>
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'MyScene02.png' (241 KB)
Preview of image 'MyScene02.png'
|
|
|
|
Jan Walzer wrote:
>
> I thought I will try also such a radiosity image, but it seems I can't get
> the right parameters...
>
> I rendered it in 2h ...
>
> Peak memory was about 340MB...
> Therefore I needed to lower the count to
> I tried it with count=196 but my memory didn't agree with this idea ;)
>
> Any ideas, how to tweak the rad-settings ?
> Other comments ?
>
The settings are not well chosen. With Povray 3.5 try starting with the
values in 'rad_def.inc' and change them if necessary.
Concerning your values:
- recursion_limit 3 can probably be decreased to at least 2.
- error_bound 0.05 is way too low for count 128 in such a scene (or try
increasing count a lot, but be aware of the memory requirements).
BTW, maybe consider posting a jpeg next time since this would be much
smaller.
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
|
|
Jan Walzer wrote:
>
> Peak memory was about 340MB...
> Therefore I needed to lower the count to
> I tried it with count=196 but my memory didn't agree with this idea ;)
>
> Any ideas, how to tweak the rad-settings ?
> Other comments ?
>
> pretrace_start 0.02
> pretrace_end 0.01
> count 128
> nearest_count 10
> error_bound 0.05
> recursion_limit 3
> low_error_factor .5
> gray_threshold 0.0
> minimum_reuse 0.01
> brightness 1
Yes, lots.
1. Lower recursion_limit to 2 if possible. In most cases, higher levels
have no significant effect on the scene.
2. The best ways to save memory, IMO, are increasing error_bound and
reducing count (both of which will reduce render time as well). In your
case, count will need to be high to get smooth lighting, but unless you
need sharp, precise shadows, an error_bound of 0.3 is sufficient.
Alternately, you could leave those values where they are, but reduce
nearest_count.. of course, that will increase artifacting, which means a
higher count, which means you end up reusing the memory you'd save..
it's a tricky dance. Try changing the error_bound first.
3. Change the low_error_factor to 1. error_bound is already sufficiently low.
4. With an error_bound of 0.3, you can improve quality by using a really
low pretrace end, say 2/width or so.
5. For some reason, setting adc_bailout to 1 seems to slightly reduce
render times while having no visible effect on the scene. This is
counterintuitive, but give it a shot.
-Xplo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
