Chambers <ben### [at] pacificwebguycom> wrote:
> Just a quick note: a few quick calculations will show that 1600 samples
> is not enough for things like a lightbulb across the room, or the sun in
> the sky, to be effectively used for radiosity.

  OTOH, why not make the lightbulb or the sun a light source?

  I don't really understand people's obsession in making radiosity-only
scenes. Radiosity calculates diffuse lighting only. If you use only radiosity
to calculate the lighting of the scene, the entire scene will consist of
purely diffusely lighted surfaces. There will be no specular component.

  When a surface is purely diffuse, without any specular component to it,
it's like a 100% matte surface, with no reflective component. There will
be no highlights caused by light sources, which will make all surfaces
matte and dull.

  It's the specular component of lighting which makes surfaces look vivid,
lively and brilliant, which make them have that "sparky" look. Purely matte
surfaces are flat and dull.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message