[Radiance-general] Sunlight through glass

[giulio antonutto]

I do totally agree with you :-)
Ciao
G.



On 18/1/06 2:23 pm, "Jack de Valpine" <jedev at visarc.com> wrote:

> Hi Giullio and others following this thread,
> 
> <RANT MODE>
> It seems to me that this is a problem with proprietary shrink wrap software
> renderers. Who really knows what is going on under the hood, whose word should
> be taken for the validity of the physical model, what validations have
> occurred?!
> 
> Users see the product marketing materials that talk about Global Illumination
> and "physical accuracy," and they believe the hype! That seems to me to be
> pretty dangerous if you are going to be using the tool to somehow "validate"
> design issues!
> 
> I know that there are systems that have implemented GI to varying degrees and
> sophistication. But the problem is you probably have to be an uber expert to
> use them and/or code up custom material/lighting shaders. Still though the
> question is what validation has occurred. I think that most commercial
> renderers and users of said systems are really not that interested in physical
> validity, they are most interested in the outcome/appearance of the final
> image. It does not really matter how it get there.
> 
> It seems to me that the one commercial product that showed some hope in its
> original (pre-acquisition) form was Lightscape. However, Rob Guglielmetti has
> explored and written pretty extensively on this topic seemingly with only
> partial satisfaction (my apologies to Rob G. for such a cursory summary, he
> did some really excellent work on this). Note I also believe that the original
> developers of Lightscape were truly interested in enabling people to use a
> tool with a reasonable and practical level of physical validity.
> </RANT MODE>
> 
> Best,
> 
> -Jack
> 
> giulio antonutto wrote:
>>  Re: [Radiance-general] Sunlight through glass About MR history and current
>> situation ( http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10185).
>> <http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10185%29.>
>> Well the whole thing started a while ago when the promised and sold the
>> certainty to get a finished software for a certain time (last September).
>> This did not happened (they are still speaking of final candidate version
>> RC0.5 and so on).
>> The software is not yet finished (it is not version 1.0).
>> Not yet implemented on all the platform where was supposed to run (on Mac is
>> still beta although they promised something in the next Œ24¹ hours) and
>> doesn¹t support all the plug-ins for 3d application that are indicated on the
>> web page.
>> This doesn¹t sound so appealing to me as well and I would understand somebody
>> delusion about the matter.
>>  
>> Having said that, I also need to add that I requested (as other friends did)
>> details about the physical accuracy of the renderer.
>> I never got an answer.
>> Is it itself an answer?
>> G.
>>  
>> PS these are my personal opinions.
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> Electronic mail messages entering and leaving Arup  business
>> systems are scanned for acceptability of content and viruses
>>   
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Radiance-general mailing list
>> Radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
>>   


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://radiance-online.org/pipermail/radiance-general/attachments/20060118/eb3a38e0/attachment.html