after getting a copy of 3.5 I updated the stone church I had done last
august. this one uses radiosity and a few changes in textures and
lighting. if anyone wants to see the source i will post it to
povray.binaries.scene-files

I would like to thank Peter Popov for his help with radiosity

the original render is here for comparison.
http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/17512/

there are some artifact's in the windows that i don't understand. they
appear as either black spots or places where the window frame is
missing.  I have max_trace_level set to 10 but this didn't appear to
change anything.  any comments?


Richard

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'stonechurchR.jpg' (251 KB)

Preview of image 'stonechurchR.jpg'

> the original render is here for comparison.
> http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/17512/


I hate to tell you, but I like the original better. I think the lighting 
is too uniform in the new one.

> there are some artifact's in the windows that i don't understand. they
> appear as either black spots or places where the window frame is
> missing.  I have max_trace_level set to 10 but this didn't appear to
> change anything.  any comments?


Could it be the anti-alias settings? Have you tried increasing the 
Antialias_Depth? I use +R6 to get fine details rendered.

/Ib

Post a reply to this message

>Could it be the anti-alias settings? Have you tried increasing the
>Antialias_Depth? I use +R6 to get fine details rendered.
>
>/Ib
>


I still have a lot to learn about lighting so i will probably change it
several times.

would I need to recompute the radiosity data to rerender the scene if I
change the Antialias_Depth? how would changing this affect render time?

Richard

Post a reply to this message

> would I need to recompute the radiosity data to rerender the scene if I
> change the Antialias_Depth? 


I'm not the right one to answer that, but I wouldn't think so.

> how would changing this affect render time?

I think it is a safe bet to say that it would increase :-) By how much 
is harder to say. It would also depend on how much of the image, that is 
actually antialiased, which depends on the threshold.

If it gets really bad, perhaps you can get away with rendering only the 
problem area at increased aa-depth, and graft it into the full image 
rendered at your usual settings.

/Ib

Post a reply to this message

rmorehouse wrote:
> would I need to recompute the radiosity data to rerender the scene if I
> change the Antialias_Depth? 

  No, if you saved the rad file. As long as you mantain the geometry and 
camera position, you can change almost anything...

> how would changing this affect render time?

  Let me guess... increasing it? ...a lot? :)

-- 
Jaime Vives Piqueres

La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org

Post a reply to this message

"Richard Morehouse" <rmo### [at] coxnet> wrote in message
news:54iumusjjrl7c270bdaa9lb5flqa4jfqun@4ax.com...

> there are some artifact's in the windows that i don't understand. they
> appear as either black spots or places where the window frame is
> missing.  I have max_trace_level set to 10 but this didn't appear to
> change anything.  any comments?

I can't see the black spots (although, given you seem to have ruled out a
max_trace problem, they sound like they might be a co-incident surface problem).

The gaps look as though the line is too thin - try rendering a small area where
the problem shows up at a higher resolution and see if the lines re-appear.

Post a reply to this message

Tom Melly wrote:
>"Richard Morehouse" <rmo### [at] coxnet> wrote in message
>news:54iumusjjrl7c270bdaa9lb5flqa4jfqun[at]4ax.com...
>
>> there are some artifact's in the windows that i don't understand. they
>> appear as either black spots or places where the window frame is
>> missing.  I have max_trace_level set to 10 but this didn't appear to
>> change anything.  any comments?
>
>I can't see the black spots (although, given you seem to have ruled out a
>max_trace problem, they sound like they might be a co-incident surface problem).
>
>The gaps look as though the line is too thin - try rendering a small area where
>the problem shows up at a higher resolution and see if the lines re-appear.
>
thanks Tom

i'll try that

Richard

Post a reply to this message

People in glass churches shouldn't throw stones.

-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.scifi-fantasy.com
mirror: http://personal.lig.bellsouth.net/lig/z/9/z993126

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

Nice ...

It strikes me that you might want to reserve some of
the busier textures for objects in the scene that you want
to attract the viewer's eye.  Maybe the floor should
just be gently-mottled squares of gray and red?  That
way, we would be able to see the light from the
stained glass where it hits the floor. :)

Aaron

Aaron Gillies
New York City
x3rxes[!]yahoo.com

Post a reply to this message

something just seems off to me... and I think it's the fact that the walls
don't seem to be able to support the roof... there just seems to be too
little space in between the windows
beware though, IANAA(rchitect) so maybe I'm all wrong...
"Richard Morehouse" <rmo### [at] coxnet> wrote in message
news:54iumusjjrl7c270bdaa9lb5flqa4jfqun@4ax.com...
> after getting a copy of 3.5 I updated the stone church I had done last
> august. this one uses radiosity and a few changes in textures and
> lighting. if anyone wants to see the source i will post it to
> povray.binaries.scene-files
>
> I would like to thank Peter Popov for his help with radiosity
>
> the original render is here for comparison.
> http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/17512/
>
> there are some artifact's in the windows that i don't understand. they
> appear as either black spots or places where the window frame is
> missing.  I have max_trace_level set to 10 but this didn't appear to
> change anything.  any comments?
>
>
> Richard
>
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message