@kadajawi: sure, I do that at the school computers
You can't post, though.
Shut these guys up!
It is a common misconception that all unbiased engines are using MLT. I don't believe anyone is claiming to use MLT as some sort of "brand" advantage.
I agree ... I don't ever remember NL or Feversoft (to name the two notable commercial examples) claiming to use MLT.
To echo another post here, neither one looks like they employ MLT but it's sometimes hard to tell (more like QMC + BiDirPT), especially if easy/hard paths are split into separate buffers. The lack of MLT-specific parameters is possibly a dead giveaway (?)
MLT will help with the underwater caustic problem but only to a limited degree. The big problem comes with tiny-solid-angle lightsources (e.g. the sun) where the mutations themselves stand a strong chance of missing the lightsource entirely, which renders them kinda useless.
I've aways toyed with the idea of just admitting that some indirect caustics can never be adequately rendered in a reasonable amount of time and just going for photon mapping for that particular problem (as an option and/or automatically enabled for difficult lightsources). At least it would avoid a particular lighting effect not appearing at all and/or having to wait days for more than the occasional speckle.
Ian.
I agree ... I don't ever remember NL or Feversoft (to name the two notable commercial examples) claiming to use MLT.
To echo another post here, neither one looks like they employ MLT but it's sometimes hard to tell (more like QMC + BiDirPT), especially if easy/hard paths are split into separate buffers. The lack of MLT-specific parameters is possibly a dead giveaway (?)
MLT will help with the underwater caustic problem but only to a limited degree. The big problem comes with tiny-solid-angle lightsources (e.g. the sun) where the mutations themselves stand a strong chance of missing the lightsource entirely, which renders them kinda useless.
I've aways toyed with the idea of just admitting that some indirect caustics can never be adequately rendered in a reasonable amount of time and just going for photon mapping for that particular problem (as an option and/or automatically enabled for difficult lightsources). At least it would avoid a particular lighting effect not appearing at all and/or having to wait days for more than the occasional speckle.
Ian.
*pling* *plong* *plang*
@Ian
I agree! I take an educational guess, that both of them do NOT use MLT at
all. At least this is the conclusion from my tests! I don't say it's bad, but
they just CAN'T solve "some" problems with there render engines that
Indigo, Radium and probably Lux after a while CAN solve! What I mean is,
there are some scenarios where PT - even biPT - seems so be the dead
end ... erm, ... it is the dead end. *LOL*
For most scenes it doesen't matter, ... but I think you know it better then I do
Ian ... hehe. Will contact you very soon with a little "snack"!
Anyway, ... the show must go on!
take care
psor
I agree! I take an educational guess, that both of them do NOT use MLT at
all. At least this is the conclusion from my tests! I don't say it's bad, but
they just CAN'T solve "some" problems with there render engines that
Indigo, Radium and probably Lux after a while CAN solve! What I mean is,
there are some scenarios where PT - even biPT - seems so be the dead
end ... erm, ... it is the dead end. *LOL*
For most scenes it doesen't matter, ... but I think you know it better then I do
Ian ... hehe. Will contact you very soon with a little "snack"!
Anyway, ... the show must go on!
take care
psor
"The sleeper must awaken"
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests