Jos Timanta Tarigan wrote:
> nice.. thx :)
> 
> here is the link:
> 
> http://pastebin.org/101457
> 
> so basically i call radiance method like 1900*1200 times (pixel) and it does 
> not supposed to take that long. anyone here ever deal with raytracing and 
> stuff? 
> 
> thanks in advance
> ================================= 
> http://www.svnstrk.blogspot.com

Nope.  My experience with raytracing is limited and Pov-Ray is all I 
have ever used.  What I do know is that even highly optimized raytracers 
are painfully slow when compared to shaders.

You should probably look at Pov-Ray.  It is open source and still has 
some semblance of a community around it.  The community and website both 
need a major overhaul.  Probably the GUI needs an overhaul too if it is 
still the hideous mess I remember it being.  Lots of opportunity there 
for C/C++ developers.  Also, look at the ideas behind OpenRT - a 
closed-source project leveraging the OpenGL name for nefarious purposes.

Raytracing still beats shaders hands-down when it comes to rendering 
refractions (e.g. glass, water, many semi-translucent materials). 
Refractions can be faked in a shader but somehow always never seem 
realistic enough.  Raytracers are generally terrible at almost 
everything else.  Refractions are painfully slow calculations.

http://hof.povray.org/glasses.html
(A pretty good example of what I'm talking about with refractions. 
Pov-Ray does a really good job with the glasses and liquid refractions - 
but doesn't do so well for the rest of the scene.)

-- 
Thomas Hruska
CubicleSoft President
Ph: 517-803-4197

*NEW* MyTaskFocus 1.1
Get on task.  Stay on task.

http://www.CubicleSoft.com/MyTaskFocus/

Reply via email to