The scenes are exactly the same. I would
agree that when using different scenes, this
could be a problem. But all I did was either
use error_bound .1 explicitly on the first
pass and error_bound .8 explicitly on the
second pass, OR I used error_bound .8 with
low_error_factor set to .125. On both
occasions, the amount of pretraces were the
same, as I didn't touch those settings. Only
for the second pass, it just loads the data
and renders that, no pretrace, but that's just
what I'd expect the other method to do: when
finally tracing the image, use error_bound .8
with the data POV-Ray has.

I would understand some dozen minutes difference,
as overhead etc are probably different, but half
a day seems somewhat too much. Thats an increase
of about 1200%!

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


>
>
> "Tim Nikias v2.0" wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > Now, I'd like to know: does low_error_factor do
> > something else than what the documentation says,
> > or have I misunderstood it? I've read section
> > "6.11.11.2.7 low_error_factor" and it plainly says
> > that it drops error_bound on the pre-final passes
> > and sets it back on the final trace...
>
> low_error_factor does exactly what the docs say, it reduces error_bound
> during final pretrace step.  Very long render times probably have
> different reasons.  Make sure you use exactly the same settings for the
> renders you compare.
>
> Doing such comparisons is often very interesting but you should not forget
> that they strongly depend on the scene used.  Creating an universal
> radiosity test scene is quite impossible.
>
> Christoph
>
> -- 
> POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
> HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
> Last updated 17 Jun. 2003 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______


---
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