[Radiance-general] Trees -- Time cost of different tree modelling approaches

[Tim Perry]

Has anyone ever quantified the run-time differences between the following?
1) Creating a tree similar the pine tree Greg provides with the Radiance distribution and insert the octree into the scene multiple times.
2) Creating a tree similar to the Pine tree Greg provides, but insert the actual .rad definition into the scene multiple times before running oconv.
3) Creating a tree outline in 2-d and rotating it 90 degrees about the z-axis to get some tree-like effects.

Has anyone ever quantified how large the effect would be for an annual simulation to use the first or second option as compared to the third option?

Thanks for your time,
Tim



________________________________
From: Greg Ward <gregoryjward at gmail.com>
To: Tim Perry <perry2of5 at yahoo.com>; Radiance general discussion <radiance-general at radiance-online.org> 
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2011 5:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Radiance-general] Trees


Hi Tim,

You can do it with trans, and it will work with the 3-phase method.  Here are some useful posts:

[Radiance-general] trans mat

[Radiance-general] trans dashboard widget

Hope this is enough to get you started!

-Greg

From: Tim Perry <perry2of5 at yahoo.com>
>Date: December 5, 2011 5:34:27 PM PST

>
>I would like to model trees outside buildings in my Radiance runs. I would like to model them transmitting about 20% of light and make the canopy 40% reflective.
>    * Can I do this by using a translucent material? 
>    * If so, can you point me to a tutorial?
>    * Will this be compatible with the 3-phase method of daylighting analysis? (I.e., daylight coefficient method with the 3-phase method and a BSDF for the window).
>
>Thanks for any help,
>Tim