"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> > On 9-11-2017 13:46, clipka wrote:
> > >
> > > Uh... and what exactly would "not cast shadows" do, if not make the
> > > object "transparent to the light [directly from light sources]"?
> > >
> >
> > Well, my thoughts did not go into that direction to tell the truth. Just
> > no shadows, without implications.
> >
>
> I'm actually with Thomas on this one-- and not just to be argumentative ;-)
>
> In its strictest sense, no_shadow implies only what it says (IMO), [blah,blah]

Well, a lightbulb finally went off in my brain, so please forget my silly
argument.

If the wall object (with no_shadow) casts no shadow from a light, then what is
supposed to fill that no-longer-existing 'shadow area'? The light, of course.
Otherwise, there would be an illogical 'void' in that area, filled with...
what??  ;-)

Duh. It took me 'only' ten days to realize this... :-[

Post a reply to this message