clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>
> Um... a looks_like object should _always_ have a emission! Otherwise it
> won't look like what a light source would look like.
>
>
> However, And has correctly hinted someplace else at conflict between
> different ways of simulating the same thing when using a "looks_like"
> object. A light source should only show up in one of the two ways of
> each of the following pairs:
>
> - Classic diffuse illumination vs. radiosity: A "looks_like" object
> should always have "no_radiosity on" set, which unfortunately isn't the
> default. (Theoretically, an alternative would be to make the light
> source invisible for the sake of the "diffuse" component, but in
> practice that doesn't make any sense due to the vast differences in
> computational effort; if you want to go that far, just leave out the
> light source entirely and go with the "looks_like" object alone.)
>
> - Specular highlights vs. reflections: A "looks_like" object should have
> "no_reflection on" set. An alternative would be to make the light source
> invisible for the sake of specular highlights, but POV-Ray doesn't
> support this at the moment (which puts me to shame, as I must admit).

Thanks for the interpretation.

Post a reply to this message