 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Why do most rad-only scenes look tinted? They either have a
greenish-yellow tint or a bluish-green (somewhat underwater) tint. I
know it's the pigments and/or light sources people use, but I don't
think that's entirely realistic.
Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] vip bg
TAG e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Peter Popov wrote:
>
> Why do most rad-only scenes look tinted? They either have a
> greenish-yellow tint or a bluish-green (somewhat underwater) tint. I
> know it's the pigments and/or light sources people use, but I don't
> think that's entirely realistic.
>
Well, in MegaPOV the default gray_threshold is 0, which in most cases makes the
radiosity lighting look too saturated IMHO. In regular POV the default is 0.5,
but perhaps people still set it too low to make the rad effects more
conspicuous.
--
Margus Ramst
Personal e-mail: mar### [at] peakeduee
TAG (Team Assistance Group) e-mail: mar### [at] tagpovrayorg
Home page http://www.hot.ee/margusrt
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Peter Popov wrote:
>
> Why do most rad-only scenes look tinted? They either have a
> greenish-yellow tint or a bluish-green (somewhat underwater) tint. I
> know it's the pigments and/or light sources people use, but I don't
> think that's entirely realistic.
>
Arnold set an industry standard?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Margus Ramst wrote:
>
> Well, in MegaPOV the default gray_threshold is 0, which in most cases makes the
> radiosity lighting look too saturated IMHO.
My tests with the Cornell box indicated that to match their radiosity
engine gray_threshold 0 is required.
Too saturated lighting results from not using assumed_gamma 1.0, light
sources without fade_distance and too saturated surface and light source
colors.
Of course it's possible the Cornell University Program of Computer Graphics
did a sloppy job with their engine but somehow I doubt it.
For artistic purposes it's good to have a tunig parameter for matching
personal tastes.
______________________________________________________________________
Kari Kivisalo http://www.kivisalo.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3A2FAB0A.D4918A9A@peak.edu.ee>, Margus Ramst
<mar### [at] peakeduee> wrote:
> Well, in MegaPOV the default gray_threshold is 0, which in most
> cases makes the radiosity lighting look too saturated IMHO. In
> regular POV the default is 0.5, but perhaps people still set it too
> low to make the rad effects more conspicuous.
I think gray_threshold 0 is supposed to be the most realistic, it is a
way to artificially limit the saturation of the color blending in the
image.
--
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chris Huff wrote:
>
> I think gray_threshold 0 is supposed to be the most realistic, it is a
> way to artificially limit the saturation of the color blending in the
> image.
>
Perhaps, although it should also help counteract the effects of a limited number
of samples and recursion levels.
And for example radiosity lit "blue sky" outdoor scenes do tend to look
unrealistically blue IMO, so despite my limited knowledge of physics I must
assume there is some aspect of natural light behaviour not provided for here.
--
Margus Ramst
Personal e-mail: mar### [at] peakeduee
TAG (Team Assistance Group) e-mail: mar### [at] tagpovrayorg
Home page http://www.hot.ee/margusrt
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Margus Ramst wrote:
>
> And for example radiosity lit "blue sky" outdoor scenes do tend to look
> unrealistically blue IMO, so despite my limited knowledge of physics I must
> assume there is some aspect of natural light behaviour not provided for here.
>
It's probably right that a blue sphere/sky_sphere is not a good physical
representation of a real sky. NTL, don't forget that the sunlight is
usually far from being 'white' so there is some kind of compensation.
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Margus Ramst wrote:
>And for example radiosity lit "blue sky" outdoor scenes do tend to look
>unrealistically blue IMO, so despite my limited knowledge of physics I
>must assume there is some aspect of natural light behaviour not
>provided for here.
>
In the real world there is no direct "colour-bleeding" from the blue sky.
It where nice if it was possible to switch off the lolour of the bleeding
from the "sky_sphere" in POV.
Photorealism: these blue pictures look as if an outdoor scene was
photographed with a film suitable for artificial light.
Ingo
--
Photography: http://members.home.nl/ingoogni/
Pov-Ray : http://members.home.nl/seed7/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3A3### [at] peakeduee>, Margus Ramst
<mar### [at] peakeduee> wrote:
> Perhaps, although it should also help counteract the effects of a
> limited number of samples and recursion levels.
This is true for some cases...
> And for example radiosity lit "blue sky" outdoor scenes do tend to look
> unrealistically blue IMO,
The human eye can compensate for color casts...try messing with the
color temperature of your monitor, for example. At first it will look
red or blue, but after a while it looks white again. POV doesn't do
this, it simulates the effect of a "perfect" film camera. If someone did
a post_process filter to simulate different types of film, you could set
it up to use an outdoor film and lessen that effect while still using
accurate radiosity settings.
--
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <Xns### [at] povrayorg>, ing### [at] homenl (ingo)
wrote:
> In the real world there is no direct "colour-bleeding" from the blue sky.
I believe you are mistaken...most of the illumination in the shade comes
from scattered light. And things lit with sky light *do* have a blue
cast, but your eyes usually adjust to it.
--
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
