> Which is why I mentioned that POV also allows you to put arbitrary objects
> in front of the virtual camera to simulate many lens effects.  Off the top
> of my head a polarising filter would be one of the few that is not possible
> to simulate.  I don't get what this has to do with assumed_gamma though,
> which lens IRL are you trying to simulate by toying with assumed_gamma?

You know I never really tried actually putting a virtual filter on the POV
camera. I've never really had to, what POV can simulate being so far from nature
in all her glory, using, say a red filter to bring out the depth in clouds. It's
hard enough just getting something that looks like a cloud. I've always used
assumed_gamma as not just the easiest but only possible way of adjusting
"curves", as they say, relative tonal values, like the red filter to bring out
depth. As you know too, from the experiments of Polaroid and others, that
filters used with actual light is very different from "filters" that could be
put in front of a POV lens, where say a red filter probably (but never tried it)
I'm guessing would just tint everything red.

Post a reply to this message