 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nekar Xenos wrote:
> stbenge wrote:
>>
>> How intense are the brightest areas of light in the original image?
>
> I've used extremely high rgb (400+) values for my light source - so I
> guess that's the problem.
> The first try was on the default settings and many other settings with
> the same results.
Wow, that's a bright light_source.
> I'm quite happy with the current result without hdr.
Cool :)
> There is one other problem: I've noticed the edge pixels don't fit in
> with the rest of the scene - but you don't notice it if the image is on
> a light background.
I think this might be an internal problem with POV-Ray itself. It's a
bad line of pixels around the edge and arises when warp{repeat n flip n}
is used on an image_map. Heck, it's probably an image_map problem, and I
wouldn't be surprised if it was somehow related to the interpolation
shifting problems clipka was exploring.
> I posted an hdr image on povray.binaries.misc for you to test on.
OK, I'll grab it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
stbenge wrote:
> Nekar Xenos wrote:
>> I posted an hdr image on povray.binaries.misc for you to test on.
>
> OK, I'll grab it.
The preliminary results don't look very promising. I tried remapping the
color values to create a new range of intensity. When the colors are
remapped 0 - 1, the result in luminous bloom is exactly the same as if a
.png or .tga image had been used. When remapped 0 - 2 or greater, the
shadows become too light, changing the light level for the entire image.
I think your best bet, if you plan to use luminous bloom, would be to
render your scenes with reasonably low light_source intensities, or just
use pngs or tgas.
Now, about that bad line of pixels around the edge. It's definitely a
problem with POV-Ray. It exists whether the "once" keyword was used or
not, and always when repeat/flip warps are used. To alter my code to fix
the problem is not really a good solution, as there is a possibility
that the render times will rise significantly. I'll try posting a bug
report, and hopefully it will be fixed soon. For now, maybe you can just
remove the outer layer of pixels?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
stbenge wrote:
> Now, about that bad line of pixels around the edge. It's definitely a
> problem with POV-Ray. It exists whether the "once" keyword was used or
> not, and always when repeat/flip warps are used.
New update. I tried adding "once" to the image_map, and now the problem
/appears/ to be gone. I could swear I had tried this before without
success. It only happens when an image is interpolated and given a
repeat/flip warp so it's definitely an interpolation issue, but probably
not a real bug.
I'll do some more testing, and when I am satisfied with the result, an
updated version of luminous bloom will be issued.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 22:26:08 +0200, stbenge <myu### [at] hotmail com>
wrote:
> stbenge wrote:
>> Nekar Xenos wrote:
>>> I posted an hdr image on povray.binaries.misc for you to test on.
>> OK, I'll grab it.
>
> The preliminary results don't look very promising. I tried remapping the
> color values to create a new range of intensity. When the colors are
> remapped 0 - 1, the result in luminous bloom is exactly the same as if a
> .png or .tga image had been used. When remapped 0 - 2 or greater, the
> shadows become too light, changing the light level for the entire image.
>
> I think your best bet, if you plan to use luminous bloom, would be to
> render your scenes with reasonably low light_source intensities, or just
> use pngs or tgas.
>
I'll stick to png. I onlys used hdr because you docs said it would be
better :)
Thanks,
-Nekar Xenos-
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
