 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Williams <mic### [at] quixnet net> wrote:
> How do I get an emission media to add to the light of a scene with
> radiosity?
Reading the documentation might help. (Tip: 6.11.11.2.9)
--
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
That ain't too difficult (see documentation). But the question for *me* is
how to let radiosity influence scattering media! Does the media test for
light sources or photons only?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message news:3e26893d@news.povray.org...
> Mike Williams <mic### [at] quixnetnet> wrote:
> > How do I get an emission media to add to the light of a scene with
> > radiosity?
>
> Reading the documentation might help. (Tip: 6.11.11.2.9)
I've tended to find that you need to set brightness > 1 to get any visible
effect. Here's the scene I played with:
#version 3.5;
#include "colors.inc"
global_settings {
assumed_gamma 1.0
ambient_light 0
radiosity{
pretrace_start 0.08
pretrace_end 0.04
count 200
media true
brightness 2
}
}
camera {
location <0.0, 0.0, -5.0>
look_at <0.0, 0.0, 0.0>
}
box{-6,6 inverse pigment{White}}
plane{y,-1 pigment{checker pigment{Gray}, pigment{White}}}
sphere{
0,1
pigment{rgbf 1}
hollow
interior{
media{
density{agate}
density{spherical}
emission <1.0,0.5,1.0>
}
}
}
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tom Melly" <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> wrote in message
news:3e269168$1@news.povray.org...
> I've tended to find that you need to set brightness > 1 to get any visible
> effect. Here's the scene I played with:
scratch that - the posted scene works with brightness 1. I think I managed to
make the floor semi-transparent on initial tests.
That said, emission media appears to be treated as a brightly lit object, rather
than an emitting object, so the effect is not very strong without a higher
brightness (which presumably might screw up other elements of the scene if you
have additional normal light sources).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Apache <apa### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> But the question for *me* is
> how to let radiosity influence scattering media! Does the media test for
> light sources or photons only?
Knowing how radiosity and scattering media works, I would suppose that
that would be really, really, really extremely incredibly astonishingly
slow.
--
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Does any one of a good way to make emission add more light to the scene with
out washing out the shadows with an over bright radiosity?
"Tom Melly" <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> wrote in message
news:3e269552$1@news.povray.org...
> "Tom Melly" <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> wrote in message
> news:3e269168$1@news.povray.org...
>
> > I've tended to find that you need to set brightness > 1 to get any
visible
> > effect. Here's the scene I played with:
>
> scratch that - the posted scene works with brightness 1. I think I managed
to
> make the floor semi-transparent on initial tests.
>
> That said, emission media appears to be treated as a brightly lit object,
rather
> than an emitting object, so the effect is not very strong without a higher
> brightness (which presumably might screw up other elements of the scene if
you
> have additional normal light sources).
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Does any one of a good way to make emission add more light to the scene
with
> out washing out the shadows with an over bright radiosity?
You could try increasing the media density (which will increase the
brightness), save the rad data, and then load the rad data with the density
reduced to normal.
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
What to think about saving radiosity samples on other locations in 3d space
than just on the surface of objects?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 23:46:16 +0100, Apache wrote:
> What to think about saving radiosity samples on other locations in 3d space
> than just on the surface of objects?
A much better solution which I was thinking of for a while would be to
scrap the radiosity system and do radiosity calculations using photon
mapping. Photon mapping was originally meant to be a full global
illumination model afterall.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Greg Edwards <edw### [at] hotmailcomremovethis> wrote:
> A much better solution which I was thinking of for a while would be to
> scrap the radiosity system and do radiosity calculations using photon
> mapping. Photon mapping was originally meant to be a full global
> illumination model afterall.
Old idea, and AFAIK Nathan has tried it with not too good success.
If you think about it, global lighting with photon mapping would be
the exact reverse of the current stochastic global lighting in POV-Ray
(ie. the photon mapping method sends rays from the light sources to the
scene, while the latter method sends rays from the current surface point
to its surroundings).
There are advantages in the latter methods, which I can't find in the
photon mapping method. Photon mapping is excellent for reflections and
caustics because the rays can be shot to a rather small portion of the
scene (more precisely, towards the bounding box of the reflecting/refracting
object), but if you want to calculate the lighting of the whole scene,
you'll have to shoot rays to the whole scene, which means pretty many rays.
Many of these rays will be shot in vain (because they will end up in parts
of the scene not seen from the camera).
The stochastic global illumination method used by POV-Ray is not problematic
per se, it's actually a good one and used by other renderers as well (eg.
Radiance). The reason for the problems in this particular implementation are
not clear. It might be buggy or not well implemented. I don't know.
--
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
