Ive <ive### [at] lilysoftorg> wrote:

> So, to answer your question, of course uses the radiosity calculation
> linear values.

Thanks; that was one of the 'missing links' in my conception of radiosity use.
>
>
> A final remark: not using assumed_gamma 1.0 causes hue-shifts that
> become more dramatic the more complex the lighting situation is AND it
> violates the very basic low of energy conservation.

Yes, that is how I now understand any *non*-assumed_gamma 1.0 to operate. (And
of course, visual results bear it out.)


> ... And if somebody uses assumed_gamma 2.2 and produces a brilliant image
> I'm glad for him but this proofs nothing and is no reason to start this
> discussion again.
>

Well, in an ideal world, with everyone having perfect recall of all of the
arcane details that make up POV-ray, I would agree. But the trouble with the
newsgroups (and even the highly-detailed reference wiki) is that the true
'nuggets of wisdom' are spread out and not easily referenced. (That's probably
the case with any large collection of facts.) In the newsgroups here, the truly
useful nuggets are contained *somewhere* in x-number of years of posts, and it
sometimes takes real detective work to find them.

I bow down to anyone who can keep *all* of that stuff in memory, for instant
recall!

Thomas here, and Bald Eagle as well AFAIK, have apparently taken the time to
create a compendium of pertinent links to old posts, that they can refer to. I
used to do the same-- until my old Win XP computer failed...and I had stupidly
neglected to back up my years of 'net links. (I've learned my lesson, the hard
way.) For me, it's almost like starting again from ground-zero.

The point is, it's not easy (at least for me) to remember all the do's and
don'ts of POV-ray operation, and especially the 'why'.

One of Clipka's many strengths was that he had infinite patience in answering
the 'same ol' questions' over and over again. Aside from his knowledge and his
willingless to share it, that was the one quality that stood out.

Post a reply to this message