"And" <49341109@ntnu.edu.tw> wrote:
> "Anthony D. Baye" <Sha### [at] spamnomorehotmailcom> wrote:
> > clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> > > Am 24.08.2015 um 15:46 schrieb Anthony D. Baye:
> > > > clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> > > >> Am 24.08.2015 um 04:53 schrieb Anthony D. Baye:
> > > >>
> > > >>> The render time for the columns is nothing compared to the water when the
> > > >>> lighting is turned on.
> > > >>
> > > >> Does the water have a diffuse component?
> > > >
> > > > diffuse 0
> > > >
> > > > See my looking for water thread in p.general its basically all there
> > >
> > > That bugs me. How come water should have such an impact on radiosity
> > > render times? That can't be, can it?
> >
> > As I understand it, the problem is the six light sources ( real ones, not
> > radiant objects) surrounding the pool.  Perhaps there's some optimization
> > possible when dealing with multiple light sources affecting a common area?
> >
> > Regards,
> > A.D.B.
>
> Maybe I can express my opinion.
> Once I rendered a scene with large area surfaces that switched the
> specular/phong on. The multiple light sources can make it slow truely.
> I only have the experience that time. Because I almost use the reflection
> instead of specular.

This only gives good results of you use photons, and I've never had good results
with photons.

Regards,
A.D.B.

Post a reply to this message