|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Alain
Subject: Re: The question about of projected through option
Date: 18 Dec 2017 18:19:45
Message: <5a384d11@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 17-12-17 à 13:36, Kenneth a écrit :
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>
>>
>> To limit the light to, say, between 40 to 50 degrees, you could create a
>> spotlight with a 50 degree angle, and another spotlight with a 40 degree
>> angle and /negative/ brightness.
>>
>
> That's an interesting concept: 'negative' light, to subtract from another light.
> Such an idea never occured to me, one worth checking out; thanks.
>
>
>
There is at least one sample scene that use a negative light. Look at
crater_dat.pov in /scenes/advanced/crater
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 17/12/2017 18:36, Kenneth wrote:
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>
>>
>> To limit the light to, say, between 40 to 50 degrees, you could create a
>> spotlight with a 50 degree angle, and another spotlight with a 40 degree
>> angle and /negative/ brightness.
>>
>
> That's an interesting concept: 'negative' light, to subtract from another light.
> Such an idea never occured to me, one worth checking out; thanks.
>
>
>
I made an animation of a negative spotlight sweeping over the Stamford
bunny a while ago. Slightly unsettling.
I posted an example in p.b.i
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thanks for the reply.
I have some new questions.
> There are a couple of things wrong with your scene. First, your lights
> and objects are inside the Prism. So you will not see anything.
(1) Does it mean that I can not see the light from the outside of the prism when
there is a light source in the prism which is transparent object?
(2) In pov-ray, is it possible for the camera to visualize the direct light from
the source?
I want to acquire the conical surface light through the prism object directly.
Regards
Masaki
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 19/12/2017 03:12, Masaki wrote:
> Thanks for the reply.
> I have some new questions.
>
>> There are a couple of things wrong with your scene. First, your lights
>> and objects are inside the Prism. So you will not see anything.
> (1) Does it mean that I can not see the light from the outside of the prism when
> there is a light source in the prism which is transparent object?
>
>
If the object is transparent or filtered then the light will shine
through. By the amount of transparency or filter value.
> (2) In pov-ray, is it possible for the camera to visualize the direct light from
> the source?
In the camera use Point_at and point your camera at the light's location.
> I want to acquire the conical surface light through the prism object directly.
>
> Regards
> Masaki
>
>
>
>
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Alain
Subject: Re: The question about of projected through option
Date: 19 Dec 2017 16:36:57
Message: <5a398679@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 17-12-18 à 22:12, Masaki a écrit :
> Thanks for the reply.
> I have some new questions.
>
>> There are a couple of things wrong with your scene. First, your lights
>> and objects are inside the Prism. So you will not see anything.
> (1) Does it mean that I can not see the light from the outside of the prism when
> there is a light source in the prism which is transparent object?
I think that he miss the transparency.
As your prism is transparent, light will shine through.
>
>
> (2) In pov-ray, is it possible for the camera to visualize the direct light from
> the source?
Never ever.
The light_source is an abstraction that have no tangible existence. It
just illuminate things. For a light_source to be visible, you need to
associate it with some object, usually by the use of looks_like{...}
It can also be achieved using an union that include the light.
Also, the camera can absolutely never ever directly see the photons if
you use them. They can only be seen when they hit a surface or are
deposited into some scattering media.
> I want to acquire the conical surface light through the prism object directly.
For that, you need to fill that prism with some scattering media.
interior{
media{ ...media descriptor... }
}
Please refer to the documentation about media, especially the scattering
media.
>
> Regards
> Masaki
>
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 17-12-19 à 07:12, Stephen a écrit :
> On 19/12/2017 03:12, Masaki wrote:
>> Thanks for the reply.
>> I have some new questions.
>>
>>> There are a couple of things wrong with your scene. First, your lights
>>> and objects are inside the Prism. So you will not see anything.
>> (1) Does it mean that I can not see the light from the outside of the
>> prism when
>> there is a light source in the prism which is transparent object?
>>
>>
> If the object is transparent or filtered then the light will shine
> through. By the amount of transparency or filter value.
>
>> (2) In pov-ray, is it possible for the camera to visualize the direct
>> light from
>> the source?
>
> In the camera use Point_at and point your camera at the light's location.
The light source will still not show.
>
>
>> I want to acquire the conical surface light through the prism object
>> directly.
>>
>> Regards
>> Masaki
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 19/12/2017 21:38, Alain wrote:
> Le 17-12-18 à 22:12, Masaki a écrit :
>> Thanks for the reply.
>> I have some new questions.
>>
>>> There are a couple of things wrong with your scene. First, your lights
>>> and objects are inside the Prism. So you will not see anything.
>> (1) Does it mean that I can not see the light from the outside of the
>> prism when
>> there is a light source in the prism which is transparent object?
>
> I think that he miss the transparency.
I did.
> As your prism is transparent, light will shine through.
>
>>
>>
>> (2) In pov-ray, is it possible for the camera to visualize the direct
>> light from
>> the source?
>
> Never ever.
> The light_source is an abstraction that have no tangible existence. It
> just illuminate things. For a light_source to be visible, you need to
> associate it with some object, usually by the use of looks_like{...}
> It can also be achieved using an union that include the light.
There is always the "Looks_like" in the camera statement.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Masaki " <mas### [at] akanewasedajp> wrote:
> (2) In pov-ray, is it possible for the camera to visualize the direct light from
> the source?
> I want to acquire the conical surface light through the prism object directly.
By "acquire", do you mean visualize?
One thing to remember about POV-Ray, is that it's only a mathematical construct
- a simulation a light and its interaction with objects. It can do that REALLY
well, so it's easy to forget, but none of it really "exists" until it gets
rendered as a pixel of a specific color and brightness.
Light, in POV-Ray is much like real light, in that you can't really see it
unless it interacts with something else. You can't see the wind itself, but you
can see its effect on things it interacts with.
You could add a cloud of media for the light to light up.
Other than that, I'd say that depending upon what you want to see as the end
result, then you might try modeling a sort of container for the light cone.
Sometimes when I'm writing a scene, I make a fake model of the light source, and
draw a cylinder from that to my look_at point, and draw a transparent cone if
it's a spotlight.
Similarly, two extremely thin nested cones with transparency might give you a
usable effect.
You might consider defining a CSG container that demarcates the boundaries of
your light, and fill it randomly with VERY small spheres (or blobs) - so thin
that they may or may not be a pixel wide, or draw VERY thin cylinders so that
you get the same random visibility along their length.
Just some ideas.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 17-12-19 à 17:37, Stephen a écrit :
> On 19/12/2017 21:38, Alain wrote:
>> Le 17-12-18 à 22:12, Masaki a écrit :
>>> Thanks for the reply.
>>> I have some new questions.
>>>
>>>> There are a couple of things wrong with your scene. First, your lights
>>>> and objects are inside the Prism. So you will not see anything.
>>> (1) Does it mean that I can not see the light from the outside of the
>>> prism when
>>> there is a light source in the prism which is transparent object?
>>
>> I think that he miss the transparency.
>
> I did.
>
>
>> As your prism is transparent, light will shine through.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> (2) In pov-ray, is it possible for the camera to visualize the direct
>>> light from
>>> the source?
>>
>> Never ever.
>> The light_source is an abstraction that have no tangible existence. It
>> just illuminate things. For a light_source to be visible, you need to
>> associate it with some object, usually by the use of looks_like{...}
>> It can also be achieved using an union that include the light.
>
> There is always the "Looks_like" in the camera statement.
>
>
Not in the camera but in the light_source.
light_source{
<100, 100, 75> rgb 1
area_light 0.5*x 0.5*y 17 17 circular orient adaptive 0
looks_like{sphere{0 1 pigment{rgb 1}finish{emission 1 diffuse 0}}}
}
It should be noted that the location of the looks_like object is
relative to the light's location.
The other option is an union:
union{
light_source{
0 rgb 1
area_light 0.5*x 0.5*y 17 17 circular orient adaptive 0
}
sphere{0 1 pigment{rgb 1}finish{emission 1 diffuse 0} no_shadow}
translate <100, 100, 75>
}
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 20/12/2017 23:55, Alain wrote:
>> There is always the "Looks_like" in the camera statement.
>>
>>
> Not in the camera but in the light_source.
You spotted my deliberate mistake. :-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |