|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The image bellow was designed in Moray and rendered in MegaPov. I did
not use the Moray setting, only the following:
radiosity {
count 300
}
All objects have the following material:
#declare Material1 =
material // Material1
{
texture
{
pigment
{
color rgb <1.0, 1.0, 1.0>
}
finish {
ambient 0
diffuse 0.8}
}
}
There is a plane above the scene to reflect the rad lighting back down.
My question is, why do the 3 objects have no radiosity shadows? I know
that since there is no direct lighting on them they will not cast ver
prominent shadows, however there should still be a fuzzy shadow on the
ground due to radiosity. The way the image looks now is very FLAT. For
some reason I have a thing for simple radiosity images, they have some
kind of beauty, any agree?
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'test6.jpg' (13 KB)
Preview of image 'test6.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Lowering pretrace_end and error_bound will show the shadows. assumed_gamma
will help radiosity to work the way it's supposed to work. Set also
Display_Gamma.
global_settings{
assumed_gamma 1.0
radiosity{
pretrace_start 0.04
pretrace_end 0.01 <-
count 100
recursion_limit 2
nearest_count 3
error_bound 0.3 <-
}
}
______________________________________________________________________
Kari Kivisalo http://www.kivisalo.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Wow that really helped thanks! At first I got a lot of blotchiness, but that
seemed to clear up if I set the error_bound a little higher, 0.5 in this case.
Kari Kivisalo wrote:
> Lowering pretrace_end and error_bound will show the shadows. assumed_gamma
> will help radiosity to work the way it's supposed to work. Set also
> Display_Gamma.
>
> global_settings{
> assumed_gamma 1.0
> radiosity{
> pretrace_start 0.04
> pretrace_end 0.01 <-
> count 100
> recursion_limit 2
> nearest_count 3
> error_bound 0.3 <-
> }
> }
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Kari Kivisalo http://www.kivisalo.net
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'test62.jpg' (12 KB)
Preview of image 'test62.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas Lake wrote:
>
> Wow that really helped thanks! At first I got a lot of blotchiness, but that
> seemed to clear up if I set the error_bound a little higher, 0.5 in this case.
You could up the nearest_count too.
______________________________________________________________________
Kari Kivisalo http://www.kivisalo.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas Lake wrote:
>
> Wow that really helped thanks! At first I got a lot of blotchiness, but that
> seemed to clear up if I set the error_bound a little higher, 0.5 in this case.
Raising the count, dropping the pretrace_end as low as practical, and
adding "adc_bailout 1" will help somewhat with the blotchiness.
Alternately, you could raise the count up to 200-300, set error_bound to
.03, adc_bailout to 1, and drop nearest_count to 1; this should give you
extremely smooth results without taking TOO long to render (and if you
try this, I'd like to hear/see your results).
-Xplo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I have a megapov radiosity tutorial on my website, it illustrates some of the
parameters:
http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/raytracing.html
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |