Here is a little experiment i was trying to do.
I'm just a newbie at pov, and, being an architect, i'm mainly interested in
the visualization of architectural projects.
That means also i have no ray-tracing technical background.
What i was trying to do is getting a simple scene rendered in 3dsmax using
Brazil, and to achieve in POV a result as near as possible
to the image rendered using Brazil.
I made a very simple set, with just walls and boxes.
One of the boxes emits light, and togheter with a sphere sky is the only
light source in the image.
Another box is rendered with a glass-like material.
The walls are mapped with a bitmap reproducing a concrete surface, and i
wanted some sort of polished-concrete
finish on it.

This is the result so far....
I'm not sure which image is better, i know the glass object in Brazil is not
good, but maybe walls look better than in POV.
The Brazil one was rendered with quite low-quality settings, because of
rendering time, while in POV i used a higher quality settings for radiosity.
Seems POV is faster, but i know it makes no sense comparing such different
engines.
I would like to tweak settings in POV in order to have as a result an image
that joins the things i like in both of the ones you can find here.
The emitting light object in Brazil is just a self-illuminated box, while in
POV i made a transparent box with an emitting media inside.
At the beginning i was using photon mapping in pov too, and it produced
interesting reflections, but i decided to turn it off in order to
go not too far from Brazil image, for which i used no caustics.

I'd like to see what do you think about the two images, and your opinion on
how to improve POV image in order to humiliate Brazil ( kidding )
thank you in advance for your tips, comments and suggestions

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'brazil.jpg' (50 KB) Download 'pov.jpg' (42 KB)

Preview of image 'brazil.jpg'

Preview of image 'pov.jpg'

> I'd like to see what do you think about the two images, and your opinion on
> how to improve POV image in order to humiliate Brazil ( kidding )
I think you already humiliated Brazil :)

I think the POV-image is a lot better!

cu!
--
camera{location-z*3}#macro G(b,e)b+(e-b)*(C/50)#end#macro L(b,e,k,l)#local C=0
;#while(C<50)sphere{G(b,e),.1pigment{rgb G(k,l)}finish{ambient 1}}#local C=C+1
;#end#end L(y-x,y,x,x+y)L(y,-x-y,x+y,y)L(-x-y,-y,y,y+z)L(-y,y,y+z,x+y)L(0,x+y,
<.5,1,.5>,x)L(0,x-y,<.5,1,.5>,x)               // ZK http://www.povplace.be.tf

Post a reply to this message

Well, I see qualities in both images, but the POV version may be most
realistic. Anyway I've seen people before who tried to compare the two
raytracers. Apparently all settings need to be different to yield similar
results.

I never tried Brazil, but my years with POV have taught me, that there's
really a bunch of tricks available to do nearly anything with a raytracing..
Maybe Brazil is more automated (?) at least I can imagine it is.. But what
is "best" depends on what you want to do.

The POV image could use more contrast, I think it looks a bit washed out..
To improve this, you could play with the "finish" settings, and I assume the
"ambient" is zero except for the glowing box.. Remember that glowing things
can have an ambient / pigment / whatever, much over 1.. Have you played with
"assumed_gamma" in global_settings? Gamma correction is turned off by
default but you can adjust it.

Regards,
Hugo

Post a reply to this message

In article <3d7e2b2f@news.povray.org>,
 "francesco" <fra### [at] molilliorg> wrote:

> The emitting light object in Brazil is just a self-illuminated box, while in
> POV i made a transparent box with an emitting media inside.

Simply using a high ambient value would be better. Use a plain white 
pigment, an ambient value of 1, and set diffuse to 0. POV radiosity 
won't even take media into account unless you tell it to, and it 
needlessly slows things down if you just want a self-illuminated box.

-- 
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message