Thats now the second time I hear that ...

I want to see that in real. Can you please sent me a ".pov"-File which I can
render in tiles to see the
problems ?

I've rendered nearly all the files in the distribution incl. some animations
and I could not see any such problems till now.

Doesn't mean I do not believe you, but I want to see this.
Maybe these influences are not really important ?

c.u.
--Theo



"Peter Popov" <pet### [at] vipbg> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:agemlukrl7ejp242e7ce7965dfgbcka3rf@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 15 Aug 2002 06:29:50 +0200, "Theo Gottwald *"
> <The### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
>
> >Principialy I see no other restrictions then there are for animations.
(No
> >Jittering).
>
> It's a problem in the way radiosity works. The radiosity samples are
> stored in an octree structure which is generated during pretrace and
> trace. The problem is that samples from one part of the image can
> affect another part of the image.
>
> If you render the image in parts, the octree for each client will be
> different and the resulting radiosity render will be different.
>
> One thing that I've often though of but never had the time
> experimenting with is merging radiosity data files. Since they are
> plain ASCII files with the octree data dumped, you can try merging the
> data files from all clients into one data file after the pretrace is
> finished, then let them use that file in the trace step. This has the
> drawback that the server will have to wait for all clients to complete
> pretrace, but it may make your system useable with radiosity scenes,
> which is a big plus.
>
>
> Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
> Personal e-mail : pet### [at] vipbg
> TAG      e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg

Post a reply to this message

In article <3d5b6fbd$1@news.povray.org> , "Theo Gottwald *" 
<The### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:

> I want to see that in real.

How about those scenes in the "radiosity" directory in the official
distribution?

And those "problems" you do not seem to notice *do* exist.  Take my word and
that of the POV-Team for it.

    Thorsten

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich
e-mail: mac### [at] povrayorg

I am a member of the POV-Ray Team.
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

In article <3d5b7460@news.povray.org> , "Thorsten Froehlich" 
<tho### [at] trfde> wrote:

> In article <3d5b6fbd$1@news.povray.org> , "Theo Gottwald *"
> <The### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
>
>> I want to see that in real.
>
> How about those scenes in the "radiosity" directory in the official
> distribution?
>
> And those "problems" you do not seem to notice *do* exist.  Take my word and
> that of the POV-Team for it.

Now that I wasted my time with this to make it clear once and for all and to
end this nonsensical discussion of something that has been shown a million
times before:

Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 11:59:33 +0200
From: "Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trfde>
Newsgroups: povray.binaries.images
Subject: Radiosity in tiled images for those who don't get it

End of discussion.

    Thorsten

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich
e-mail: mac### [at] povrayorg

I am a member of the POV-Ray Team.
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

So what you all are saying is, if you have a radiosity scene where you only
render a small portion of the full camera's view, that "tile" will not look
the same as that same area on the fully rendered picture?  This does not
seem to be right.  Each process started by SMPOV is simply rendering a part
of the whole camera's view, so each process would be calculating the
radiosity in the exact same way.

khaver

Post a reply to this message

In article <3d5bd44c@news.povray.org> , "khaver" <kha### [at] netzeronet> wrote:

> So what you all are saying is, if you have a radiosity scene where you only
> render a small portion of the full camera's view, that "tile" will not look
> the same as that same area on the fully rendered picture?  This does not
> seem to be right.  Each process started by SMPOV is simply rendering a part
> of the whole camera's view, so each process would be calculating the
> radiosity in the exact same way.

If you don't understand how POV-Rays radiosity works, just shut up, please.

    Thorsten

Post a reply to this message

> If you don't understand how POV-Rays radiosity works, just shut up,
please.
>
>     Thorsten

LOL!

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 15 Aug 2002 09:18:18 -0700, "khaver" <kha### [at] netzeronet>
wrote:

>So what you all are saying is, if you have a radiosity scene where you only
>render a small portion of the full camera's view, that "tile" will not look
>the same as that same area on the fully rendered picture?  This does not
>seem to be right.  Each process started by SMPOV is simply rendering a part
>of the whole camera's view, so each process would be calculating the
>radiosity in the exact same way.
>
>khaver
>

<tippy_toe> pssst ... <whisper> hi khaver ... check out
http://www.povray.org/documentation/view/309/ section 9.1.3.2
</whisper> </tippy_toe>

Cheers,

Scott

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 15 Aug 2002 11:09:41 +0200, "Theo Gottwald *"
<The### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
> I want to see that in real. Can you please sent me a ".pov"-File which I can
> render in tiles to see the problems ?

1. take any radiosity scene from standard distro
2. render it with jitter and aa off
3. render subregion with jitter and aa off
4. compare each pixel of results

ABX

Post a reply to this message

Thorsten Froehlich wrote:

> If you don't understand how POV-Rays radiosity works, just shut up, please.

Why be so rude ?  If that's the 123125th time someone asks the same
thing, there is probably someone else willing to give the 123125th
answer, so you don't have to "waste your time"...

Fabien.

Post a reply to this message

In article <3D5### [at] skynetbe> , Fabien Mosen 
<fab### [at] skynetbe>  wrote:

>> If you don't understand how POV-Rays radiosity works, just shut up, please.
>
> Why be so rude ?  If that's the 123125th time someone asks the same
> thing, there is probably someone else willing to give the 123125th
> answer, so you don't have to "waste your time"...

Well, if the same question has been answered in previous posts a few hours
ago multiple times already and then someone starts it all over again without
reading the previous messages or understanding the topic I think one should
tell them the truth and not continue the "play nice, think he is an idiot"
game.

Just my opinion, of course.

    Thorsten

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message