POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.binaries.images : Another Picture, Another Question <18k jpg> : Re: Another Picture, Another Question <18k jpg> Server Time
3 Oct 2024 11:14:55 EDT (-0400)
  Re: Another Picture, Another Question <18k jpg>  
From: David Fontaine
Date: 27 Jan 2000 01:26:14
Message: <388FE268.F99AF683@faricy.net>
> Well there's always the inverse square with distance law (?) about light, which
> should apply to any and all light despite it's origination, be it emitted
> reflected or refracted light, it will diminish.  Am I right?

You are exactly 100% correct! The thing is that an object twice as far away will
illuminate 1/4 the area on your retina at 1/4 the intensity and therefore appear the
exact same brightness. That is why distance shading is physically inaccurate.
<but_then_nothing_about_POV_light_is_physically_accurate_is_it?>
This does bring up a good point though. If the fade_power used is 3 like it is here
than it would be 1/9 the brightness for 1/4 the area and be approx. 1/2 as bright.
And normal non-fading lights should illimunate much brighter farther away. <g>
</but_then_nothing_about_POV_light_is_physically_accurate_is_it?>
I remember my brother asking me why planes got darker in the distance if light
didn't fade and I had to explain to him that the angle is increasing.

--
Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
___     ______________________________
 | \     |_       <dav### [at] faricynet>
 |_/avid |ontaine      <ICQ 55354965>


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.