Hi everyone,

I just wanted to show you a video I created using Jaime's office scene obtained
from http://www.ignorancia.org/en/index.php?page=The_office . The video I
created is kept here at
http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ahanda/output_with_shadows_and_reflections_moving.avi .
I had created this video by placing the camera (no
change anywhere else in the code!) at various different locations and obtained
the images. What you'd notice is that the shadows and reflections are moving. I
don't know whether it has to do with radiosity settings so that if I add more
rays it will remove this kind of thing because I certainly know that light
source is fixed. I have rendered this video using 2 passes:  radiosity saving in
one pass and using it the next pass as mentioned on his website. Can you tell me
if there's anything I can do to make sure I obtain stationary shadows and
reflections? The video being 333MB may take a while to download in case you need
few images you can also obtain them here at
www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ahanda/POVRayimages.tgz . All you need to do is to play them
one by one to see what's happening!

Thanks,
Ankur

Post a reply to this message

On 26/01/12 18:57, handos wrote:
> What you'd notice is that the shadows and reflections are moving.

   Well, what you are noticing is not really any shadow or reflection
movement... these are radiosity artifacts. What you call "shadows" are
really directly visible splotches, which are also visible on the
reflections. As these splotches are different for each frame, you see
them as "moving".

   Apart from the suggestions from Alain on a similar post from August, I
can't think on anything else. My experience with animation is almost
zero, so I never had to deal with this problem, but I'm guessing it has
no easy solution, or at least not a fast one as you want... ;)

--
Jaime

Post a reply to this message

On 1/26/2012 11:57 AM, handos wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I just wanted to show you a video I created using Jaime's office scene obtained
> from http://www.ignorancia.org/en/index.php?page=The_office .
It looked so neat that I thought I'd try to render it myself, however 
the t_black_plastic texture seems to be missing. I've got POV 3.7rc3 
installed; could it be from a previous version of POV that was not 
carried forward into 3.7?

Post a reply to this message

On 27/01/12 20:22, Dave wrote:
> It looked so neat that I thought I'd try to render it myself, however
>  the t_black_plastic texture seems to be missing. I've got POV 3.7rc3
>  installed; could it be from a previous version of POV that was not
> carried forward into 3.7?

   No, it's supposed to be declared in "i_textures.inc": do you have this
file? Perhaps the download got corrupted...

--
Jaime

Post a reply to this message

On 1/27/2012 1:30 PM, Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:
> On 27/01/12 20:22, Dave wrote:
>> It looked so neat that I thought I'd try to render it myself, however
>> the t_black_plastic texture seems to be missing. I've got POV 3.7rc3
>> installed; could it be from a previous version of POV that was not
>> carried forward into 3.7?
>
> No, it's supposed to be declared in "i_textures.inc": do you have this
> file? Perhaps the download got corrupted...

I apologize, my mistake, POV could not find various images because they 
were in the maps/ folder.

I have moved all the files in the maps/ folder to the same folder in 
which office.pov exists and office.pov now renders correctly -- a very 
nice image!

Sorry, I should have looked at the error message more closely.

Post a reply to this message

Am 27.01.2012 16:43, schrieb Jaime Vives Piqueres:
> On 26/01/12 18:57, handos wrote:
>> What you'd notice is that the shadows and reflections are moving.
>
> Well, what you are noticing is not really any shadow or reflection
> movement... these are radiosity artifacts. What you call "shadows" are
> really directly visible splotches, which are also visible on the
> reflections. As these splotches are different for each frame, you see
> them as "moving".
>
> Apart from the suggestions from Alain on a similar post from August, I
> can't think on anything else. My experience with animation is almost
> zero, so I never had to deal with this problem, but I'm guessing it has
> no easy solution, or at least not a fast one as you want... ;)

If you are using a static scene, radiosity artifacts should be 
comparatively easy to get "static" by saving radiosity data and re-using 
it from frame to frame. Beneficial side effect is a good deal of speedup 
for the rendering, as radiosity has to be sampled only for areas that 
hadn't been visible to the camera in previous frames.

You might also want to do a first low-fps low-resolution pass to gather 
radiosity data, and then use that in the high-resolution render proper.

Post a reply to this message