 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Samuel Benge
Subject: another double_illumination + radiosity test (lamp.jpg 36kb)
Date: 21 Jun 2002 23:47:11
Message: <3D13F326.9040107@caltel.com>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Here's another one. I couldn't help but to try a test with a lamp shade.
The shade has an opaque pigment with specular highlights and double
illumination. Radiosity uses a recursion_limit of 1.
Questions, comments?
--
Samuel Benge
sbe### [at] caltel com
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'lamp.jpg' (37 KB)
Preview of image 'lamp.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Apache
Subject: Re: another double_illumination + radiosity test (lamp.jpg 36kb)
Date: 22 Jun 2002 00:25:07
Message: <3d13fc23$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The wall.... is that an isosurface?
--
Apache
POV-Ray Cloth experiments: http://geitenkaas.dns2go.com/experiments/
Email: apa### [at] yahoocom
ICQ: 146690431
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: David Fontaine
Subject: Re: another double_illumination + radiosity test (lamp.jpg 36kb)
Date: 22 Jun 2002 00:50:25
Message: <3D140352.10700@faricy.net>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
That's pretty good, except I think that bright triangle on the shade
isn't entirely realistic. Of course, it depends on the shade material,
but I would expect enough scattering to make the shade more uniformly
bright. After all, isn't that the point of them?
--
___ ______________________________________________
| \ |_ website: http://davidf.faricy.net/
|_/avid |ontaine email: <dav### [at] faricynet>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Samuel Benge
Subject: Re: another double_illumination + radiosity test (lamp.jpg 36kb)
Date: 22 Jun 2002 01:08:22
Message: <3D140642.5030901@caltel.com>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Apache wrote:
> The wall.... is that an isosurface?
Nope, just a box with a simple pigment and surface normal:
pigment{rgb 1}
normal{
granite -.25
accuracy .005
scale 32
turbulence .4
lambda 1
poly_wave .25
}
--
Samuel Benge
sbe### [at] caltelcom
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Samuel Benge
Subject: Re: another double_illumination + radiosity test (lamp.jpg 36kb)
Date: 22 Jun 2002 01:11:03
Message: <3D1406E3.8040008@caltel.com>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
> That's pretty good, except I think that bright triangle on the shade
> isn't entirely realistic. Of course, it depends on the shade material,
> but I would expect enough scattering to make the shade more uniformly
> bright. After all, isn't that the point of them?
Actually, the specular finish was originally intended to give the
impression of light leaking through tiny holes. A more realistic
approach for that would have been to make the highlight strech from the
top of the shade to the bottom... could be faked using a normal I guess.
--
Samuel Benge
sbe### [at] caltelcom
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Fernando Gonzalez del Cueto
Subject: Re: another double_illumination + radiosity test (lamp.jpg 36kb)
Date: 22 Jun 2002 04:11:31
Message: <3d143133@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I also liked very much the texture from the wall! As David already said it,
that triangular bright spot is the only thing that spoils the image.
Except that, it is an excellent image!
Fernando.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
