 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
JRG wrote:
>
> This was just meant to be a test render. Then time passed and I began to
> realize that radiosity (even with not-so-extreme settings) doesn't get on
> with glass. How is it possible? Is there something in the code that says
> "hey, a transparent object! Make a 100000-steps-for()-loop for every pixel
> to make it slower. Only the patient ones will deserve it!"? Is there a way
> to speed up radiosity indoor scenes (possibly with glass)?
> I'm not a patient one, so I killed the render after 41 hours of agony.
>
Hmm, are those wood planks isosurfaces?
Glass with radiosity can be quite slow, but 1d17h is not very extreme for
such a scene. I had a similar situation in my picture for the 10best
cover image contest and it came near a halt (~30min per line) on my old K6
when reaching the glass objects. There were photons and a lot of
isosurfaces too of course.
Something that would really help in such a situation would be a
no_radiosity modifier for objects. You could create a second bowl for
radiosity with no_image, no_shadow and no_reflection and a simple material
and use no_radiosity for the real bowl.
The fruits look great, apart from the leftmost apple floating in the air
of course. Is there subsurface scattering on the orange?
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmx de>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:
> Remember: radiosity+glass+area_light+antialias>=infinite :)
Then radiosity+glass+area_light+antialias+isosurfaces...
> A pain you killed it: but if it was just finishing the glass! The slow
> part was almost finished! Oh...
No. Every line was getting slower and slower, no matter how much glass the
line was passing through. I think that in radiosity scenes glass can
considerably slow down things even if it is behind the camera...
--
Jonathan.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann wrote:
> Hmm, are those wood planks isosurfaces?
Yes, they are.
> Glass with radiosity can be quite slow, but 1d17h is not very extreme for
> such a scene. I had a similar situation in my picture for the 10best
> cover image contest and it came near a halt (~30min per line) on my old K6
> when reaching the glass objects. There were photons and a lot of
> isosurfaces too of course.
But it was a final render, not a simple test! :)
I have to say that with recursion_limit 1 things were a bit less slow, but
the unlit parts were completely black, so I had to raise it to 3.
Not to mention the fact that without the glass object the scene looked much
brighter (who knows why)...
> Something that would really help in such a situation would be a
> no_radiosity modifier for objects. You could create a second bowl for
> radiosity with no_image, no_shadow and no_reflection and a simple material
> and use no_radiosity for the real bowl.
What about rendering the scene without the glass, saving radiosity data, and
reloading them later with always_sample off and with the glass objects
included? Would it look good? I have to try.
> The fruits look great, apart from the leftmost apple floating in the air
> of course.
<Cough>... :)
> Is there subsurface scattering on the orange?
Nope. The scattering with that iso was really slow and didn't look that
good. But with radiosity it looks good anyway.
--
Jonathan.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Set glass or transparent objects like this when saving rad data:
no interior
no normal
no reflection
diffuse 0 ambient 0
filter/transmit only
Then set them back to normal and:
load_file "rad.dat" always_sample off pretrace_start 1 pretrace_end 1
diffuse 0 ambient 0 appeared to speed it most.
This was just from 10 minutes of testing so more quality may
be possible without increasing render time dramatically.
_____________
Kari Kivisalo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I did some more testing and this is good for glass when
saving rad data:
max_trace_level recursion_limit+1
diffuse 0 ambient 0
no normal
no reflection
Low res without aa is enough for the rad data.
Close beta 7 before rendering with the saved data. It was
very slow when rendering right after saving the rad data.
_____________
Kari Kivisalo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kari Kivisalo wrote:
> I did some more testing and this is good for glass when
> saving rad data:
>
> max_trace_level recursion_limit+1
> diffuse 0 ambient 0
> no normal
> no reflection
I will try it for sure.
> Low res without aa is enough for the rad data.
Even with high quality settings?
> Close beta 7 before rendering with the saved data. It was
> very slow when rendering right after saving the rad data.
Hmm, is this a known bug of some sort?
Thanks for the hint,
--
Jonathan
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
JRG wrote:
>
> > Low res without aa is enough for the rad data.
>
> Even with high quality settings?
If you want to force rad sample for every pixel then
you must use final resolution but 1/2 - 1/3 resolution
should be enough for most scenes.
> > Close beta 7 before rendering with the saved data. It was
> > very slow when rendering right after saving the rad data.
>
> Hmm, is this a known bug of some sort?
I haven't reported this yet due to lack of minimal scene
but I think there is a "using load_file after save_file
causes slowdown" bug which may be related to "restarting
while in pretrace causes slowdown" bug.
The combined rendertime for the rad and final scenes
was 1/8th of the one pass render for my test scene.
_____________
Kari Kivisalo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I've rendered a 320x240 version for saving data, which took about 20
minutes. I followed your suggestions and I also turned off the area_light
and the displacement of the iso- wood planks.
Now I'm rendering the 640*480 version which seems quite fast. I will post
the result when finished.
I'm wandering how save_file and load_file work. I mean, if turn
always_sample off it shouldn't matter whether you use some radiosity
settings or some others, should it?
--
Jonathan.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
beautiful scene.
G
JRG <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message news:3be39102@news.povray.org...
> This was just meant to be a test render. Then time passed and I began to
> realize that radiosity (even with not-so-extreme settings) doesn't get on
> with glass. How is it possible? Is there something in the code that says
> "hey, a transparent object! Make a 100000-steps-for()-loop for every pixel
> to make it slower. Only the patient ones will deserve it!"? Is there a way
> to speed up radiosity indoor scenes (possibly with glass)?
> I'm not a patient one, so I killed the render after 41 hours of agony.
>
> --
> Jonathan.
>
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Amazing! That looks very real.
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
