"nemesis" <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> > One thing I noticed was that the balcony scene, when rendered without photons,
> > does not show the shadow of the drink, so obviously there's some more work to
> > be done than just radiosity.
>
> Perhaps not.  I remember one day rendering a glass scene with and without
> photons (no radiosity) and was astounded to realize that glass without
> refraction and caustic would feature very little shadow after all.  It makes
> sense:  caustics are the result of bent rays of light passing through the glass
> and gathering at a single point or region, so the other parts of the occluded
> "shadow" should really show much darker, since the light is not directly going
> through the transparent material as in the no refraction/caustics image...

There's something wrong with your argument:

- This is not just plain water, but some orange-ish drink. We can plainly see
the colour, so it should cast a corresponding coloured shadow.

- In 3.6, it *does* cast the expected shadow when photons are off. In 3.7 it
doesn't: I imagine being able to make out an ever so slight shadow from the
glass itself, but nothing at all from the drink in it.

(BTW, when I talk about "photons being turned off", I actually mean the scene
file being changed to "#declare Photons=off" (or whatever that file happens to
use for it), not disabling photons through INI file quality settings)

Post a reply to this message