In article <Xns### [at] 204213191226>,
 "Rafal 'Raf256' Maj" <raf### [at] raf256com> wrote:

> > Since he is using 3.1, he doesn't have photons and the radiosity is
> > much worse. 
> 
> I was alsow as YOu suggesting switching to 3.5

I didn't see that in your message.


> > And I don't see why area lights, radiosity, or photons
> > would have any place in a shape demo scene.
> area_light - soft shadows

And slower rendering, with no benefit to the demonstration of the shapes 
themselves.


> photons - reflections from few of this shapes

But still no help at displaying the shapes. These are "shape samplers".


> I write _maybe_ radiosity because imho it's effect will not be nottacible 
> (unles i.e. changing scene to indor

The improved lighting radiosity gives would make the shapes easier to 
see, but would slow things down, and for a scene this simple a few 
lighting tricks would work better.

-- 
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message