And, another thing: I was just looking through
the source-code...

The media-glow are objects which shouldn't leave a
shadow, right? Why didn't you use no_shadow to avoid
some extra calculation?
Also, the sphere's radius is 8, though the spherical
media inside is just <4.5,2.1,4.5>, so you could've used
only 4.5 (or perhaps 4.6 to be on the safe side), to make
boundary objects smaller and also leave some intense
media-calculations out...
Also, the media uses default sampling/intervals/method,
setting those could've perhaps made the calculations quicker,
but I'm not too sure about that...

If you don't mind, I'll try to use a smaller sphere and render
the next frame that way, if it works, I'll keep it, and otherwise
I'll use your settings again. But using a sphere with media where
the density doesn't fill the entire sphere doesn't make much sense
to me... But perhaps shadowing could interfere with this...

Hm. Looking at the first image, I also notice artifacts showing
up. These line up with the size of the containers for the media...

I'll see. 5 lines left for the first image.

--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde

Post a reply to this message