|
 |
On 06/07/2011 04:24 PM, Samuel Benge wrote:
> Jim Holsenback<nom### [at] nomail com> wrote:
>> On 06/06/2011 08:59 PM, clipka wrote:
>>> Am 07.06.2011 01:40, schrieb Jim Holsenback:
>>>
>>>> Question about pretrace_end ... won't a smaller value make more of the
>>>> samples to be gathered in the final pass? I thought it was better to
>>>> shoot for having the final pass sample count about half the total.
>>>
>>> No. The smaller the pretrace_end, the higher the density the pretrace
>>> can theoretically produce, and the fewer therefore the spots missed
>>> during pretrace, which need to be sampled in the final pass (i.e. the
>>> render proper).
>>>
>>> (Theoretically we'd want the final pass sample count to be zero, but
>>> then we also want the render to finish in our lifetime.)
>>
>> in addition to earlier changes I had to increase count to 384 ... it's
>> not too darn bad, so I think it's worth the cycles to go to 512 for the
>> beauty run. btw: I also corrected my (holy crap) spelling error in the sign.
>
> Hey Jim,
>
> It's looking good!
>
> Is the water messing with the radiosity? If so--and you don't plan to have
> anything reflect in the water--you might be able to use an aoi pattern with a
> texture_map, using careful color settings to fake fresnel reflections.
I've got radiosity importance set low on the water so I don't think I
was the source of my radiosity problems ... since the sun is low I was
wondering how to get it a bit of color, so maybe the aoi pattern/texture
map idea is worth some investigation.
>
> You might also want to try the new version of OTO.inc I dropped in
> p.b.scene-files. I improved the size variation of the bricks and trimmed up the
> edges.
Cool ... I was playing around with the tile scaling then ran into a seq
fault (see my post in beta NG) ... so it'll be interesting to see if
your new take on OTO makes a diff.
Hasta Bye
Post a reply to this message
|
|
