Hm, hadn't thought about that combination. AFAIK, method 3 is supposed to be
run with intervals on 1, and high sampling rate, whereas method 2 requires
intervals rather than samples. That's just a supposition of mine, if anyone
wants to correct me on that to a significant degree, I'd be happy to listen.


-- 
Tim Nikias v2.0
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights
Email: tim.nikias (@) gmx.de


> > Update: A quick test revealed that the same occurs with difference
spheres
> > instead of smoothly blobbed "difference", so it ain't a precision
problem
> > with blobs. Hm.
>
> I rendered within a sky_sphere, nothing else in the scene and it didn't
have
> the darker place on that near upper edge. Then I realized I hadn't used a
> camera high enough above the candle and once I lowered it I saw it too.
>
> Turns out that it can be made less obvious if intervals is raised some.
> Well, the original dark place disappears. I know media method 3 is
supposed
> to auto-adjust that for you but nothing is perfect, and you had it at
> intervals 1 so I figured that was a good place to start changing things
> around.
>
> The dark place was the inside curvature, near as I can tell, and it looks
> like it might take an increase in samples, density, intervals or some
> combination of those in order to help eliminate it. Actually, from what
I've
> seen by trying that here, I can still see the inner dimple through the
outer
> shell. Might take a lot of tweaking on those things to get it looking
okay.
>
> -- 
> Bob H.
> http://www.3digitaleyes.com
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 09.10.2003

Post a reply to this message