 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I have been experimenting with 2-pass radiosity and I can't get my image
clean. I get alot of artifacts. Why?
Here is final image:
http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/4084/2pass01ru2.jpg
Here is 1st pass radiosity parameters (rendering resolution 64x48, no AA):
pretrace_start 0.08
pretrace_end 0.01
count 400
nearest_count 20
error_bound 0.3
recursion_limit 3
low_error_factor 0.2
gray_threshold 0
minimum_reuse 0.015
brightness 1.0
adc_bailout 0.01/2
Here is 2st pass radiosity parameters (rendering resolution 640x480, with
AA):
pretrace_start 1 // default 0.08
pretrace_end 1 // default 0.01
error_bound 0.8
recursion_limit 3 // default 2
always_sample off
And yes, I save/load radiosity file :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
motorsep wrote:
> I have been experimenting with 2-pass radiosity and I can't get my image
> clean. I get alot of artifacts. Why?
>
> Here is final image:
> http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/4084/2pass01ru2.jpg
>
> Here is 1st pass radiosity parameters (rendering resolution 64x48, no AA):
> pretrace_start 0.08
> pretrace_end 0.01
> count 400
> nearest_count 20
> error_bound 0.3
> recursion_limit 3
> low_error_factor 0.2
> gray_threshold 0
> minimum_reuse 0.015
> brightness 1.0
> adc_bailout 0.01/2
>
> Here is 2st pass radiosity parameters (rendering resolution 640x480, with
> AA):
> pretrace_start 1 // default 0.08
> pretrace_end 1 // default 0.01
> error_bound 0.8
> recursion_limit 3 // default 2
> always_sample off
>
> And yes, I save/load radiosity file :)
Hm, in my experience, you using error_bound * 2 or *4. works best, and
since you use 0.3 and 0.8, the averaging of neighbouring samples might
not be optimal. Additionally, I'm not sure if you need that high a
recursion limit for this scene, I guess 2 should suffice (unless the
windows are real objects, but if you're using two-pass, I'd suggest
leaving them out of the initial pass entirely).
Have you taken a look at my experiments with two-pass renderings?
http://www.nolights.de/projects/radiosity/radiosity.html
I try to explain a few things there which might give you additional
hints, although the only three things I'd suggest are recursion_limit of
2, proper error_bound multiplying, and setting count higher.
Regards,
Tim
--
aka "Tim Nikias"
Homepage: <http://www.nolights.de>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
motorsep nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 06/10/2006 19:32:
> I have been experimenting with 2-pass radiosity and I can't get my image
> clean. I get alot of artifacts. Why?
>
> Here is final image:
> http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/4084/2pass01ru2.jpg
>
> Here is 1st pass radiosity parameters (rendering resolution 64x48, no AA):
> pretrace_start 0.08
> pretrace_end 0.01
> count 400
> nearest_count 20
> error_bound 0.3
> recursion_limit 3
> low_error_factor 0.2
> gray_threshold 0
> minimum_reuse 0.015
> brightness 1.0
> adc_bailout 0.01/2
>
> Here is 2st pass radiosity parameters (rendering resolution 640x480, with
> AA):
> pretrace_start 1 // default 0.08
> pretrace_end 1 // default 0.01
> error_bound 0.8
> recursion_limit 3 // default 2
> always_sample off
>
> And yes, I save/load radiosity file :)
>
>
>
I'm not sure about it, but maybe, just maybe, using a larger resolution for the
first pass could help. It may gather more radiosity samples.
A low error_bound need higher count, you may need around 1000 or more, possibly
all the way up to 1600. I regularly use count in the 300~500 range with default
error_bound.
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
Beam me up Scotty. This isn't the men's room.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I am so frustrated :(
I have tried everything and I still get terrible image with artifacts. I
don't know why :( Maybe it has to do with geometry in my scene or scale.. I
don't know.
I would appreciate if somebody could take my scene and look into it and tell
what do I do wrong, please.
http://rapidshare.de/files/36122463/interior.rar.html
Thank you!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
motorsep nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 09/10/2006 14:46:
> I am so frustrated :(
> I have tried everything and I still get terrible image with artifacts. I
> don't know why :( Maybe it has to do with geometry in my scene or scale.. I
> don't know.
> I would appreciate if somebody could take my scene and look into it and tell
> what do I do wrong, please.
> http://rapidshare.de/files/36122463/interior.rar.html
> Thank you!
Rendering now. Aparently, your error_bound is to low. Testing with error_bound
0.5 instead of 0.05 and the artefacts on the ceiling are almost gone.
I propose using error_bound of about 0.7 to 1.0. You may even try using the
default value: 1.8.
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
If one synchronized swimmer drowns, do the rest have to drown too?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
motorsep wrote:
> I am so frustrated :(
That's what you get for using radiosity.
> I have tried everything and I still get terrible image with artifacts. I
> don't know why :( Maybe it has to do with geometry in my scene or scale.. I
> don't know.
> I would appreciate if somebody could take my scene and look into it and tell
> what do I do wrong, please.
If you rendered the room at night, with a light inside the room it would
be far easier. It's a cheat but you'd get a nice image with just the
default pov radiosity settings and an indoor light.
At the moment (apart from a very small patch of floor) your scene is
only lit by radiosity.
Remember that increasing the error_bound makes it smoother, so if it
looks blotchy increase the error bound.
Is this render ok?
(apart from the exposure as I've not got megapov)
http://www.thirteen.dynu.com/~martin/pov/test_pass1.jpg
All I did was render the first pass at 160*120 and then increase your
2nd stage error bound to 0.8
The other issue with your lighting is the room seems to be floating in
mid air, if you added a ground plane then you'd have less light hitting
your ceiling from outside.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
