<delete_thread>true</delete_thread>

Feature requests, bug reports and related discussion
Post Reply
7 posts • Page 1 of 1
User avatar
Zom-B
1st Place 100
Posts: 4701
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 4:18 pm
Location: ´'`\_(ò_Ó)_/´'`
Contact:

<delete_thread>true</delete_thread>

Post by Zom-B » Thu Feb 08, 2007 1:29 am

Hey Ono...

while playing with the WinOsi Caustic Test Scene, I found out, that reducing aperture_radius also reduces the lightning in the untonemapped.exr file, here an example for this scene using BlackBody (gain = 111):

Image

I used the 0.7t3 version with obj import!
Last edited by Zom-B on Thu Feb 08, 2007 3:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
polygonmanufaktur.de

User avatar
manitwo
Posts: 1029
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 4:50 am
Location: Tirol - Austria

Post by manitwo » Thu Feb 08, 2007 1:34 am

if the indigo cam is handled like a real cam then its no bug.
the bigger the aperture radius the more light will come through.

User avatar
Zom-B
1st Place 100
Posts: 4701
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 4:18 pm
Location: ´'`\_(ò_Ó)_/´'`
Contact:

Post by Zom-B » Thu Feb 08, 2007 1:52 am

manitwo wrote:if the indigo cam is handled like a real cam then its no bug.
the bigger the aperture radius the more light will come through.
:shock: :shock: :shock:


I thought this aperature Radius is a DOF strength thing :?
Someday I got to learn all this english therms...
So no bug, just me => stupid?!
polygonmanufaktur.de

User avatar
manitwo
Posts: 1029
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 4:50 am
Location: Tirol - Austria

Post by manitwo » Thu Feb 08, 2007 1:59 am

I thought this aperature Radius is a DOF strength thing
It is. The aperture is the thing that is called "blende" in german.
good explanation here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aperture

User avatar
Silverman
Posts: 65
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 11:05 am
Location: Chico, CA USA
Contact:

Post by Silverman » Thu Feb 08, 2007 6:41 pm

but an aperture radius of 0.01 is larger than 0.0001, the effect in ZomB's image shows the opposite of what we should expect because the image at aperture radius 0.0001 is brighter. Unless I've confused something, it is backward. :?: :?

User avatar
Kram1032
Posts: 6649
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:55 am
Location: Austria near Vienna

Post by Kram1032 » Thu Feb 08, 2007 11:03 pm

extracted from my biology book:
(it's German, so be aware of weird translations ;))

There are 4 kinds of "eyes":
1) light sense cell
An earthworm has some of these in his skin. So, he can "see", if it is dark or bright.
If it's bright, he searches earth to get into the dark ;)
2) dump eye
Same as earthwors "eyes", but reduced to a special part of the body, already.
Limpets have this kind of eyes.
The light sense cells are placed in a dump. This way, you're possible, to also "see" from where the light comes.
3) pinhole camera eye
This is already very close to our eye: it's spherical and the closing layer has a pinhole (pupil ;)) on it. This way, you can see
1)strength of light
2)direction of light
and, which is new,
3) Shapes
nautilus have this kind of eyes.
What's missing to our eye?
The lens!
Why do we need a lens?
To answer this, let's look at the disadvantage of this system:
1) and 3) are contingent on themselves.
If your pupils are wide opened, you can see in the dark quite well, but, since more light comes from more directions, the shape, you want to see gets blurry. So, the darker it is, the blurrier you can see.

The solution?
A lens, which bundles the light, to get it sharp.

For some reason, the sight of colour is the very last step of evolution.
Only a few of the animals, who have got lens eyes, can see colours.

Any type of eyes, that was there before, wasn't able to see colours at all.

Insects have done a quite different kind of development:
Faceted eyes, which are able to see very special parts of light:
They can see more pics/sec (if they wont, they would crash together much more often ;))
They can see polarized light. (Don't know why this is important)
They can see more pixels (Your computer monitor would look quite "pixely" for them)
Very often, they can see a part of UV and IR-light.
I.e. Many flowers would be even more colourful, if you'd see UVlight. So bees can see much of this light...
But every facet is a lens, so it's just even more complex than ours.
Although we can't see very much of the spectrum of light, the part we CAN see, we can see most detailed in animality ;)

User avatar
CTZn
Posts: 7240
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 4:34 pm
Location: Paris, France

Post by CTZn » Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:34 am

but an aperture radius of 0.01 is larger than 0.0001, the effect in ZomB's image shows the opposite of what we should expect because the image at aperture radius 0.0001 is brighter. Unless I've confused something, it is backward. :?: :?
My two cents: maybe it's an adaptation of the reinhard tone mapping system ?

Post Reply
7 posts • Page 1 of 1

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 3 guests