S Andreason wrote:
One more thing, the trees are still very dark, especially noticeable in
daylight and sunny skies.
looking at Models/Trees/deciduous-tree.ac for example,
MATERIAL NoName rgb 1 1 0.8 amb 1 1 0.8 emis 0 0 0 spec 0 0 0 shi
2 trans 0
Is the specularity supposed to be
Vivian Meazza wrote:
I think it's as right as we are going to get it, given all the unknowns
about the objects and the scattering particles in the environment at any
time or place.
One more thing, the trees are still very dark, especially noticeable in
daylight and sunny skies.
looking
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 11:13 AM, S Andreason wrote:
One more thing, the trees are still very dark, especially noticeable in
daylight and sunny skies.
looking at Models/Trees/deciduous-tree.ac for example,
MATERIAL NoName rgb 1 1 0.8 amb 1 1 0.8 emis 0 0 0 spec 0 0 0 shi
2 trans 0
Is
S Andreason wrote
Vivian Meazza wrote:
I think it's as right as we are going to get it, given all the unknowns
about the objects and the scattering particles in the environment at any
time or place.
One more thing, the trees are still very dark, especially noticeable in
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
* Vivian Meazza -- Saturday 04 April 2009:
This is how I think it should look,
Does indeed look much better here (on my *still* quite bad monitor ;-).
Alright I've updated the ambient table (multiplied all values by 2.5)
Let me know what you all think with the CVS
Erik wrote
Vivian Meazza wrote:
I'm doing a small adjustment in light.cxx - seems to work:
float ambient = _ambient_tbl-interpolate( deg ) + (0.25 + 0.75 *
visibility_inv/10);
Not sure that I fancy tinkering around in Data/Lighting/ambient -
someone
has obviously taken a
Vivian Meazza wrote:
I've now amended the table to reflect the static offset, and I'm happy with
the result.
Even at midnight?
I was worried the ambient might be too light with a static offset.
Do you want proceed with this, or just drop it?
Lets get it right this time.
Erik
Erik
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
* Vivian Meazza -- Saturday 04 April 2009:
This is how I think it should look,
Does indeed look much better here (on my *still* quite bad monitor ;-).
Alright I've updated the ambient table (multiplied all values by 2.5)
Let me know what you all think
Erik wrote
Vivian Meazza wrote:
I've now amended the table to reflect the static offset, and I'm happy
with
the result.
Even at midnight?
I was worried the ambient might be too light with a static offset.
Do you want proceed with this, or just drop it?
Lets get it right this
Vivian Meazza wrote:
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
Alright I've updated the ambient table (multiplied all values by 2.5)
Let me know what you all think with the CVS version of src/Time/light.cxx
Looks nice here, I hope others will agree.
I agree. Looks _very_ good now.
Is there
There seemed to be a problem with my mail since I noticed in the
archives there were some replies to my previous post about this item.
I've tweaked the values some more and think I've got it just about right
(or good enough) this time.
Erik
Erik
There seemed to be a problem with my mail since I noticed in the
archives there were some replies to my previous post about this item.
I've tweaked the values some more and think I've got it just about right
(or good enough) this time.
Erik
The ambient light is still too low
* Vivian Meazza -- Saturday 04 April 2009:
I can fix it here, to my entire satisfaction, so if everyone else is
happy, don't worry.
I can't really say much about this, as I'm using a rather old and not
so great monitor that I don't seem to be able to calibrate correctly.
But I agree that the
Vivian Meazza wrote:
I'm doing a small adjustment in light.cxx - seems to work:
float ambient = _ambient_tbl-interpolate( deg ) + (0.25 + 0.75 *
visibility_inv/10);
Not sure that I fancy tinkering around in Data/Lighting/ambient - someone
has obviously taken a lot of care to craft
Vivian Meazza wrote:
I'm not clear about how much ambient light there should be in any situation,
but, to me right now there isn't enough with the default model. The effect
of visibility on the diffuse and specular setting looks OK in very low
visibility, but at high visibility it looks very
15 matches
Mail list logo
