In article <39D95736.CC78C2F0@unforgettable.com>, 
inq### [at] unforgettablecom wrote:

> Nonsense. They'd light their immediate area pretty well, but the overall
> illumination is much too bright. Inverse square and all that, you know.

Such a large number of candles would still light the area pretty well. 
Diffuse lighting would also help. The lighting in this image seems about 
right to me.

-- 
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

I can't say about this particular building (object), but I can say that a
much higher, vaulted ceiling shows variations in shadowing. In real time you
can see shadows flicker just as the candles do. Therefore, I would think the
light should fade a tad as it approaches the ceiling, even here.

I always like Gail's work, of course! :)

Grim

Post a reply to this message

GrimDude <gri### [at] netzerocom> wrote in message
news:39dfec09@news.povray.org...
> I can't say about this particular building (object), but I can say that a
> much higher, vaulted ceiling shows variations in shadowing. In real time
you
> can see shadows flicker just as the candles do. Therefore, I would think
the
> light should fade a tad as it approaches the ceiling, even here.

I'm re rendering it with the brightness turned down and the recursion
turned up. I think it looks better dimmer.

> I always like Gail's work, of course! :)

Thank you.

Gail
********************************************************************
* gsh### [at] monotixcoza              * System.dat not found.         *
* http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~gail/ * Reformat hard drive Y)es O)k  *
********************************************************************
* If at first you don't succeed, call it version 1.0               *
********************************************************************

Post a reply to this message