-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 11.10.2010 12:52, Nathan Letwory wrote: > Revision: 32412 > > http://projects.blender.org/plugins/scmsvn/viewcvs.php?view=rev&root=bf-blender&revision=32412 > Author: jesterking > Date: 2010-10-11 11:52:25 +0200 (Mon, 11 Oct 2010) > > Log Message: > ----------- > Add note about Inv Quad falloff of lamp that there seems to be a hack in use.
Matt, you committed r12045 somewhere in September 2007. LA_FALLOFF_INVSQUARE calculates something, but AFAICT it is not correct. I just want to ask if this calculation uses this formula intentionally or if it is a typo? Currently switching between Lin/Quad Weighted (where linear att is 0.0f) and Inverse Quad gives different output, but that seems wrong. /Nathan > case LA_FALLOFF_INVSQUARE: > + /* NOTE: This seems to be a hack since > commit r12045 says this > + * option is similar to old Quad, but > with slight changes. > + * Correct inv square would be (which > would be old Quad): > + * visifac = lar->distkw / (lar->distkw > + dist[0]*dist[0]); > + */ > visifac = lar->dist / (lar->dist + > dist[0]*dist[0]); > break; - -- Nathan Letwory Letwory Interactive http://www.letworyinteractive.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEVAwUBTLLgzqtfN7KsE0TtAQKTmwgAh4iw9JzaHcYHgJ1qD2zSVlvX0EmDvwFf 3GqbKjnsWDgBw8C1KIb8Nx2/wkNHNXxP9f58G7ZTD8yqr2xvvNm/GvNOqyDxtmO6 AwCvRbGs/sYxsmSvq5dtIy04e8WXXR95e0LmiVPC5uEpFttKDchQSKPhIi6Zm74X cZ0eGjpAtCjra9SI0hgjgfxYEtlLMI72b8ZC1gG1uRRhN7JHmT7JH3JG5B7FRxxN wJT2xp5LADZusxIb41mV2EAQZCQMJnIVfELizvGzo8UQf3Axcmnms0CTnBDNL37e zS1iMwB2mJUc9JzE6rfJzijQU4J8g/QXaM0SNuiJ99I+9IH2QsGEXg== =Dopx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
