clipka <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> If it was my call, I'd say let's just fix the black-splotch thing, get a few
> details more towards the original Ward paper, make a new beta of it, and see
> what reports come in.

  Any chances of removing the upper limit of 1600 samples? While 1600 samples
is a lot, some people have encountered the limit and complained about it.

  Unless I'm mistaken, those samples are precalculated and hard-coded into
the source. Removing the limit would probably mean that you need to calculate
new samples (above those 1600) by using a random number generator. If you do
so, the absolutely *don't* use rand() from <cstdlib>, but instead use a
high-quality fast RNG designed for stochastic sampling.

  I have made a C++ version of Bob Jenkins' ISAAC random number generator,
if you are interested. It's fast (significantly faster than rand() or the
RNG used in POV-Ray), has a humongous period, and should be of very high
quality (way higher than rand() or the RNG used in POV-Ray).

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message