Richard Morton wrote:
> 
> It's always struck me as strange that this is the way that raytracing has to
> work, ie start from the film or screen and work backwards. What's missing below
> is that the ray has to continue until it hits a light source or goes off into
> infinity (in which case it won't appear). 

	It does not have to work that way. Certainly one could compute all the
rays that will never hit the film. That shouldn't take more than a few
thousand times longer to get the same result. 

> Matt Giwer (almost) wrote:
> 
> >         I think ...
> >
> >         Take a point on the film, shoot it through the pinhole, see what it
> > hits, calculate what is where it hits and what affects what it hits then
> > what it passes through on the way back if applicable.
> >

-- 
He raped Thrace thrice.
	-- The Iron Webmaster, 288

Post a reply to this message