Well, not much to say to that, you've got straight
A's on your radiosity-examn. :-)

Seriously though: I was just analyzing indoor scenes
with pure radiosity, especially scenes where the lightsource
is more or less a lightbulb or something similiar. Shadows
produced by those are very soft, as said before.
But sure, with the right settings, one could get crisper
shadows. Still, I'd go so far and say that for the majority
of scenes where radiosity is used indoors, shadows
produced thereby are very soft.


-- 
Tim Nikias v2.0
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights


>
> > Additionally, it might be of interest to know that using
> > actual lightsources gives sharper shadows (though using
> > area-lights to get soft shadows is a must for realistic lighting,
> > somewhat paradox). BUT, it must be said that shadows
> > produced by pure radiosity lighting are VERY soft.
>
> It really depends on the circumstances. With a sufficiently low
> error_bound and high count, and the right environment, I have seen
> radiosity produce some pretty sharp shadows. The "problem" is that the
> scenes where radiosity typically has the greatest obvious impact vs.
> normal point lighting are those where there are large lit areas (skies,
> well-lit rooms with white walls, etc) and naturally when light is coming
> from everywhere, you're going to have some pretty soft shadows.
>
> If you want sharper shadows in such a scene, you'll have to set it up so
> that the "main" light sources in the scene are much brighter than the
> lit objects around them (or else reduce the radiosity brightness, which
> provides much the same effect). I think you'll see this as you start
> playing with outdoor scenes with full sun, although an indoor
> environment could also work if you're using a bright, naked light bulb
> for lighting.
>
> -Xplo
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.501 / Virus Database: 299 - Release Date: 14.07.2003

Post a reply to this message