> confidence 0.0001> variance 1.0/1.0
This is strange... you made it completely not care whether it was accurate
or not? And still got a realistic effect? How does that work?
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
Apache wrote:
> Oh sorry! I guess it's "Tuatha de Danna"
Actually, "Tuatha de Dannan" is the name of the sub in Full
Metal Panic. Here's a composite I just assembled...ok, I
just spent about an hour or so assembling ^_^;
Whatever.
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.scifi-fantasy.com
mirror: http://personal.lig.bellsouth.net/lig/z/9/z993126
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Slime wrote:
>> confidence 0.0001>> variance 1.0/1.0> This is strange... you made it completely not care whether
> it was accurate or not? And still got a realistic effect?
> How does that work?
It's probably not actually a realistic effect, but a pale
simulation of one...;)
(the ultralow confidence/ultrahigh variance is how to optimize
the speed of media when you're playing around with the OTHER
numbers and are doing several dozen renders of the same thing
in a row)
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.scifi-fantasy.com
mirror: http://personal.lig.bellsouth.net/lig/z/9/z993126
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
> It's probably not actually a realistic effect, but a pale> simulation of one...;)>> (the ultralow confidence/ultrahigh variance is how to optimize> the speed of media when you're playing around with the OTHER> numbers and are doing several dozen renders of the same thing> in a row)
Interesting. Was this on 3.1 or 3.5? (So that I can know what sampling
method it was.) I'm beginning to think that method 1, if used well, is more
powerful than method 3. Sometimes I'd rather have a grainy artifact than the
more noticeable artifact that method 3 sometimes gives with too few samples.
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]