 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Spider jumps in here.
Ken wrote:
>
> Greetings Mr. Nathan Kopp Sir,
>
> A couple of quick questions in regards to the Photon feature of your
> newest patch. There are statistics available when using the photon feature.
Hmm, I'd like to see them even If I don't finish the render, taht would be
useful to tweak the settings and don't wait for eternety.
> The first is a counter in the lower left of the window frame. If you are
> lucky enough to get your scene description set up correctly it starts to
> display two pieces of information when parsing the scene. One number to
> the left for the photon map and a second number in parenthesis. What are
> the two numbers and what may be learned from them as they are displayed ?
As far as I know..
Theese go once for every object that photons affect.
left number is shot photons(increasing by 500) and right number is stored
photons.
theese go for all objects.
> Second question is in regards to the statistics reported in the message
> window when a render is finished. Here you have as many as four statistics
> returned - that is the most I have seen so far anyway.
I like stats :-)
> For example I just finished a render with these reported results:
>
> Photons:
> Shot - 245,000
> Stored - 117,000
It means that about 45% of all photons actually hit an object and therefore is
stored.
> Priority Que:
> Insert - 124,000
> Removed - 165
noo idea.
> I would like to know what this is telling me in regards to the
> numbers returned. Do I need to adjust my choice of parameters,
> is it is in the ballpark for the process, or this is just useless
> statistics put there to make the process look more important but
> actually tells you nothing ? (just kidding on the last part :) ).
Well, the first are relevant for your settings, if they are to big
difference(100 000 / 10 000 ratio) you really need to tweak. :-)
<snip number 3>
> Thank you for taking the time to read this and I am really enjoying
> the new art coming from my computer.
same here :-)
> You dun guud things Mr. Nathan Kopp Sir.
and here :-)
--
//Spider
[ spi### [at] bahnhof se ]-[ http://www.bahnhof.se/~spider/ ]
What I can do and what I could do, I just don't know anymore
"Marian"
By: "Sisters Of Mercy"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Spider wrote:
>
> (good answers)
Look at the times our messages were posted. A tie! hehehe. :-)
-Nathan
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nathan Kopp wrote:
>
> Spider wrote:
> >
> > (good answers)
>
> Look at the times our messages were posted. A tie! hehehe. :-)
>
> -Nathan
No, wait... you beat me by 22 seconds.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
hehe, but I think you have better answers..
Nathan Kopp wrote:
>
> Nathan Kopp wrote:
> >
> > Spider wrote:
> > >
> > > (good answers)
> >
> > Look at the times our messages were posted. A tie! hehehe. :-)
> >
> > -Nathan
>
> No, wait... you beat me by 22 seconds.
--
//Spider
[ spi### [at] bahnhofse ]-[ http://www.bahnhof.se/~spider/ ]
What I can do and what I could do, I just don't know anymore
"Marian"
By: "Sisters Of Mercy"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nathan Kopp wrote:
>
> A gather size of
>
> radius .09*phd*sqrt(20)/2, 1 // only one gather size
> // (all photons are the same density)
>
> works better on that test scene I posted.
>
> If your gather size is too small, your caustics (both reflective and
> refractive) may be a bit darker than they should be. I'll have
> to test this more.
>
> -Nathan
Thank you for your replies to my questions. In regards to the
term caustics as used above I have one more little question.
With the photon patch is it necessary to use the caustics interior
modifier for the caustic reflections ? It doesn't seem likely to me
but I have not heard explicitly one way or another on the this and
would like a clarification for sake of proceedural accuracy.
Again thanks and that disco ball is almost finished. :)
--
Ken Tyler
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote:
>
> Thank you for your replies to my questions. In regards to the
> term caustics as used above I have one more little question.
> With the photon patch is it necessary to use the caustics interior
> modifier for the caustic reflections ? It doesn't seem likely to me
> but I have not heard explicitly one way or another on the this and
> would like a clarification for sake of proceedural accuracy.
The 'caustics' keyword will have no effect on photon mapping.
-Nathan
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Actually, that keyword only get in the way, sometimes hiding the "true"
caustics..
Nathan Kopp wrote:
>
> Ken wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for your replies to my questions. In regards to the
> > term caustics as used above I have one more little question.
> > With the photon patch is it necessary to use the caustics interior
> > modifier for the caustic reflections ? It doesn't seem likely to me
> > but I have not heard explicitly one way or another on the this and
> > would like a clarification for sake of proceedural accuracy.
>
> The 'caustics' keyword will have no effect on photon mapping.
>
> -Nathan
--
//Spider
[ spi### [at] bahnhofse ]-[ http://www.bahnhof.se/~spider/ ]
What I can do and what I could do, I just don't know anymore
"Marian"
By: "Sisters Of Mercy"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nathan Kopp wrote:
>
> Ken wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for your replies to my questions. In regards to the
> > term caustics as used above I have one more little question.
> > With the photon patch is it necessary to use the caustics interior
> > modifier for the caustic reflections ? It doesn't seem likely to me
> > but I have not heard explicitly one way or another on the this and
> > would like a clarification for sake of proceedural accuracy.
>
> The 'caustics' keyword will have no effect on photon mapping.
>
> -Nathan
I suspected as much but wanted it confirmed ono the less. Thanks.
I just posted your request for a photon patch, user generated
disco like mirrored ball, reflecting multiple beams of colored
light, which appear as spots of multicoloured lights illuminating
the surrounding walls, into the povray.binaries.images group.
I would just like to go on record after this little exercise as
saying it sure would have been easier had I been able to use spot
lights for the light sources. Trying to hide 60 colored lights with
an intensity of 1.8 is a challenge unto itself without the aid of
the programs spotlight light_source modifier. Had I not hidden them
they would have washed out the desired effects. In consequence they
had to be obscured from everything but the reflective surfaces they
were pointed at. Not insurmountable but but uniquely challenging to
say the least.
If anyone wants the source for this to do an animation with I am more
that willing to hand it off to someone else to peruse. A 600x400 with
the current settings took 15.6 minutes to render and maybe 1.5 to parse
on my P-200 machine.
--
Ken Tyler
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
: If anyone wants the source for this to do an animation with I am more
: that willing to hand it off to someone else to peruse. A 600x400 with
: the current settings took 15.6 minutes to render and maybe 1.5 to parse
: on my P-200 machine.
I can make that animation in my PII-350 (with a limitation: I don't have
net connection at home, so I will only carry the resulting mpeg in
disquettes, not all the frames...)
--
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote:
>
> I would just like to go on record after this little exercise as
> saying it sure would have been easier had I been able to use spot
> lights for the light sources. Trying to hide 60 colored lights with
> an intensity of 1.8 is a challenge unto itself without the aid of
> the programs spotlight light_source modifier. Had I not hidden them
> they would have washed out the desired effects. In consequence they
> had to be obscured from everything but the reflective surfaces they
> were pointed at. Not insurmountable but but uniquely challenging to
> say the least.
60 lights!!! wow! You could have used spotlights, by the way. It's
just that the photon part treats them as point lights... meaning that,
while during the regular trace part they'll act like spotlights, photons
can shoot out of them in any direction. Of course, this won't always
be the case... I just didn't code that part yet.
-Nathan
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
