POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.binaries.images : weird media artifacts? : Re: weird media artifacts? Server Time
1 Aug 2024 00:21:10 EDT (-0400)
  Re: weird media artifacts?  
From: Alain
Date: 27 Feb 2009 16:55:25
Message: <49a8614d@news.povray.org>
clipka nous illumina en ce 2009-02-27 03:26 -->
> CShake <cshake+pov### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> Unfortunately, it's not something that seems to have been fixed with the
>> beta. Here is a simpler test image, it renders identically in all the
>> version I have to test in: Windows: Offical 3.6.1 & 3.7b31 and MegaPOV
>> 1.2.1; Mac OS X: official 3.6.1, MegaPov 1.2.1 (PowerPC)
>>
>> I didn't try clipka's idea of media sampling quality yet, but here's the
>> code for this test image so you can verify:
> 
> This is indeed a sampling quality issue: As the ray travels through the media,
> it encounters alternating intervals of bright / dark light caused by the
> "patterned" spotlight from the right.
> 
> The default number of samples is not enough to sample each single of these light
> cones reliably. Note that you have something like 5 light cones in sequence to
> be traversed by a ray; the default of 10 samples is barely enough to place a
> single sample in each bright and each dark interval, and leaves no room for any
> precision.
> 
> So with default settings you inevitably get an aliasing effect in the media
> sampling.
> 
> With just that single light source, it isn't much of a problem: The aliasing
> errors average out to a good deal, and the result looks convincing enough to
> the human eye.
> 
> The problem surfaces, however, with the additional spotlight, as it causes POV
> to modify the distribution of the media samples in an attempt to optimize it
> for the standard case (whic is that the spotlight's cone makes up one single
> illuminated interval), resulting in modulations to the aliasing effects, and
> eventually moiree patterns.
> 
> Cranking up the quality helps indeed, e.g. using intervals 10 and samples 10,10
> significantly reduces the amount of moiree (though it still remains visible; at
> the same time the light pattern becomes less smooth, but close inspection shows
> that this is actually more realistic.)
> 
> 
intervals 1 samples 100 is much FASTER than intervals 10 samples 10 or samples 
10,10. If you use samples 10, 50 the value after the coma is always ignored when 
using the default sampling method.

-- 
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
Islam: If shit happens, kill the person responsible.


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.