POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.binaries.images : is radiosity (MP) really necessary? [tot~80KB Jpg] : Re: is radiosity (MP) really necessary? [tot~80KB Jpg] Server Time
1 Oct 2024 07:18:27 EDT (-0400)
  Re: is radiosity (MP) really necessary? [tot~80KB Jpg]  
From: Bob Hughes
Date: 5 Sep 2000 09:57:10
Message: <39b4fbb6$1@news.povray.org>
"Christoph Hormann" <Chr### [at] schunteretctu-bsde> wrote in
message news:39B4F61C.19135F25@schunter.etc.tu-bs.de...
|
| Recursion limit above 1 is not necessary in many situations, but there has
to be
| something wrong IMO, because you should get at least a strong bluish touch
| because of the sky in every radiosity version.  It could help if you would
| explain the changes made between the radiosity/no radiosity version.

Isn't much changed, well that's a white lie.  The ambient is dropped to near
zero for the radiosity images but that's a well known fact (I just tend to
leave it non-zero though, very low).  And the lighting is changed somewhat
as well as the sphere (not sky_sphere) for the sky because of the drastic
differences when ambient is dropped.  In other words, ambient and diffuse
for the sky is .6, .6  in radiosity and .67, .33 without.
The radiosity itself is done like so:

#if (Use_MP & Rad = yes)
 ambient_light <.1,.05,.025>
 ini_option "+qr"
 radiosity {
pretrace_start .08
pretrace_end .01
         media off
         normal on
         count 100 // or 50 // may be too low
         nearest_count 5
         error_bound .321
         low_error_factor .321
         gray_threshold .2
         recursion_limit 2 // or 1
         minimum_reuse .0167
        // brightness 1.333
          }
#else
 ambient_light <1,1.025,1.05>*.75
#end
}

Hope that tells you what you were wanting to know.

Bob


Post a reply to this message

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