clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 20.03.2017 um 15:53 schrieb muyu:
> > "muyu" <lsy### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> >> from [povray.general]
> >> Am 20.03.2017 um 11:38 schrieb muyu:
> >>
> >>> Thanks. 1) Regarding my simulations, around 50% of the light is reflected in
> >>> near-infrared. So physically the expected error should be much less than 1%.
> >>> This should be neglible?
> ...
> >> You mentioned reflection above; did you also account for the transmitted
> >> light?
> ...
> >> finish {ambient 0 diffuse 0.4957 0.4409}}
>
> That's 0.9366 in total, which means that at each radiosity recursion
> step, 93.66% of the light is /not/ absorbed.
>
> Which means that after 20 recursion steps, 26.98% of the light is
> /still/ not absorbed.
> >>
> >> diffuse 0.4957 is front diffuse, 0.4409 is the transmitted light? Should I set
> >> rgbt or rgbf?
>
> Don't use `rgbt` nor `rgbf`, unless your similated leaves are supposed
> to transmit a portion of the light unscattered.

For each leaf, 0.4957 is scatted directly. 0.4409 is transmitted and scatted. So
as I understood, I should not use any filter. The two sides diffuse is the right
choice. Am I right? So it means 20 times of recursion is not enough? Is it
possible to set larger value.Now for me, the rendering time is still
acceptable.

>
> > The reflectance of each pixel was calculated relative to the reference panel
> > with the same light source and camera setup
> > // the reference panel--------------------------------------------------------
> > plane { <0,0,1>, 0
> >         texture{ pigment{color rgb<0, 1, 0>}
> >                  finish {ambient 0 diffuse 1.0 0.0 conserve_energy}
> >                } // end of texture
> >       } // end of plane
> >
> > Reflectance = (Simulation/Reference)^2.2
>
> Are you using File_Gamma=2.2, or why is that exponent in there?

Here I did not set File_Gamma = 1.0. But the result should be same if I use this
Reflectance = (Simulation/Reference)^2.2.

Thanks again.

Shouyang

Post a reply to this message