Well I finally found rad settings that improved the image and rendered in a
reasonable amount of time. I used an error_bound of 0.4 and decreased the
pretrace start to 0.01 and pretrace end to 0.0025. This is the version that
will become my poster.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'boxrad.JPG' (116 KB)

Preview of image 'boxrad.JPG'

"Thomas Lake" <tla### [at] homecom> wrote in message
news:3b5e4c11@news.povray.org...
> Well I finally found rad settings that improved the image and rendered in
a
> reasonable amount of time. I used an error_bound of 0.4 and decreased the
> pretrace start to 0.01 and pretrace end to 0.0025. This is the version
that
> will become my poster.

    Man, does JPeg ever kill this picture..

Post a reply to this message

"Povray" <tch### [at] ductapenet> wrote in message
news:3b5ef638@news.povray.org...

>     Man, does JPeg ever kill this picture..

Err.. no.


Andy

Post a reply to this message

> > reasonable amount of time. I used an error_bound of 0.4 and decreased
the
> > pretrace start to 0.01 and pretrace end to 0.0025. This is the version
> that
> > will become my poster.
>
>     Man, does JPeg ever kill this picture..

Hmm really? I tried to avoid that by using a relatively low compression
level, could you point out which parts of the image are affected by it?

Post a reply to this message

"Thomas Lake" <tla### [at] homecom> wrote in message
news:3b5e4c11@news.povray.org...
> Well I finally found rad settings that improved the image and rendered in
a
> reasonable amount of time. I used an error_bound of 0.4 and decreased the
> pretrace start to 0.01 and pretrace end to 0.0025. This is the version
that
> will become my poster.
>

    Have you tried a higher pretrace_start setting ? I've found whacking it
right up to 1.00 for final renders gets rid of ugly rad artifacts...

--
Scott Hill.
Software Engineer.
E-Mail        : sco### [at] innocentcom
Pandora's Box : http://www.pandora-software.com

*Everything in this message/post is purely IMHO and no-one-else's*

Post a reply to this message

Scott Hill wrote:

> Have you tried a higher pretrace_start setting ? I've found whacking it
> right up to 1.00 for final renders gets rid of ugly rad artifacts...

Actually all I've been using for a while is pretrace_start = pretrace_end = 1
(in Megapov). The strangest thing is that I don't know what I'm losing doing
that.

G.

--

**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
Graphic experiments
Pov-ray gallery

Post a reply to this message

"Gilles Tran" <tra### [at] inapginrafr> wrote in message
news:3B5F250E.276DA256@inapg.inra.fr...
> Scott Hill wrote:
>
> > Have you tried a higher pretrace_start setting ? I've found whacking it
> > right up to 1.00 for final renders gets rid of ugly rad artifacts...
>
> Actually all I've been using for a while is pretrace_start = pretrace_end
= 1
> (in Megapov). The strangest thing is that I don't know what I'm losing
doing
> that.
>

    Well, the way I understand it, the rad pretrace settings are similar to
the mosaic preview settings, i.e. they're expressed as a percentage of the
image width... So with start=end=1.00 you're saying "take one sample at the
image width and do no more"... I think... Yeah, I'm pretty sure this
correct - if you set pretrace_start to 1.00 and pretrace_end to 0.50 you'll
see the rad pretrace stage gets down to 'blocks' half the width of the image
before the final pass starts... 0.25 ends at blocks 1/4 of the width and so
on... So, it seems to follow that, for max rad quality you need to set
pretrace_start=1.00 and pretrace_end=1/imagewidth... Having said that, the
'blocks' start getting kind of blurry when they get to around 4x4pixels, no
matter what the pretrace_end setting is...

--
Scott Hill.
Software Engineer.
E-Mail        : sco### [at] innocentcom
Pandora's Box : http://www.pandora-software.com

*Everything in this message/post is purely IMHO and no-one-else's*

Post a reply to this message

Yes, I'd buy that one when my boat comes in.

Alf

Post a reply to this message

> Yes, I'd buy that one when my boat comes in.

Hehe thanks:-) That will be 1,000,000$ please.

> Alf

Post a reply to this message

"Scott Hill" <sco### [at] innocentcom> wrote in message
news:3b5f5261@news.povray.org...
> "Gilles Tran" <tra### [at] inapginrafr> wrote in message
> news:3B5F250E.276DA256@inapg.inra.fr...
> > Scott Hill wrote:
> >
> > > Have you tried a higher pretrace_start setting ? I've found whacking
it
> > > right up to 1.00 for final renders gets rid of ugly rad artifacts...
> >
> > Actually all I've been using for a while is pretrace_start =
pretrace_end
> = 1
> > (in Megapov). The strangest thing is that I don't know what I'm losing
> doing
> > that.
> >
>
>     Well, the way I understand it, the rad pretrace settings are similar
to
> the mosaic preview settings, i.e. they're expressed as a percentage of the
> image width... So with start=end=1.00 you're saying "take one sample at
the
> image width and do no more"... I think... Yeah, I'm pretty sure this
> correct - if you set pretrace_start to 1.00 and pretrace_end to 0.50
you'll
> see the rad pretrace stage gets down to 'blocks' half the width of the
image
> before the final pass starts... 0.25 ends at blocks 1/4 of the width and
so
> on... So, it seems to follow that, for max rad quality you need to set
> pretrace_start=1.00 and pretrace_end=1/imagewidth... Having said that, the
> 'blocks' start getting kind of blurry when they get to around 4x4pixels,
no
> matter what the pretrace_end setting is...

Hmm this is an interesting discusion, I've been wondering what these
settings really do, the pov docs arn't much help here. I'll have to do some
testing to see how different settings affect different images, but I'm not
going to play with this image any more.

Post a reply to this message