> Wow, so many questions :-)
> I just noticed you said before that you thought the Sun is 2 degrees across.
> Wrong.  It's closer to 0.5 degree, but then there is the surrounding
> brightness in the air.  Still probably not 2 degrees wide of a source of
> light enough to contribute to the main source, I wouldn't think anyway.
> So the Sun is 1/360th of the arc of the whole sky.
> Not sure what is meant by that 1:100 ratio.  The Sun being about 864,000
> miles across and 93 million miles away and the Earth being about 8,000 miles
> across makes for about a 1:11,625 ratio of Earth diameter to Sun distance,
> with about a 1:107 ratio for Sun diameter to Earth distance.  Must be the
> Sun then eh? :-)
> 70,000 unit planet isn't the thing to figure from anyway, just the sun(s)
> size(s) and that's still solar system-like.
> All moot if Tatooine and it's system is totally different, but judging from
> the movie the ratios are probably going to be similar.  Simply add the
> second sun.

someone else mentioned the 1/100, and since i don't know about those
things, i figured it was right.  the reason i mentioned the planet size
is because i don't want to make the sun the right size at the right
distance.  what i want is to bring the sun closer, and make it smaller
because pov freaks out when you have both really big and really small
numbers in the same scene.  so if i could make the sun proportionately
closer so that it were still 1% and illuminate the planet as if it were
at the correct size and distance, that would be great.  and what about
the parallel keyword?

> Anyhow, back to the spotlight question(s).
> You can go up to but not quite 90 for the both radius and falloff (same
> value each), that's what you'd want to do for the non-penumbra form (not
> certain of use of that word concerning lights, umbra should mean the unlit
> area though and penumbra the partially lit).  But you really wouldn't need
> it that wide I'd think.  If everything were to scale then a 1 degree light
> ought to be fine for the distance you would have.
> Not sure if it matters at all as long as no other object is in the scene
> away from the planet, concerning the speed of render.  Also 'tightness 1'
> (or zero?) will close the penumbral part of a spotlight if you were to use a
> falloff larger than the radius.
> You do know of course that area_light using spotlight will be the same way
> as a point light too.  That array of spotlights could be a real slowdown but
> maybe it wouldn't be too slow.
> 
> Bob

Post a reply to this message