Skip to main content
added 4 characters in body
Source Link
user1703
user1703

The sentence says it: radiosity precomputes an "image" for all potential viewpoints at the same time, i.e. it doesn't focus on just the rays that hit a particular observer. Hence there are naturally many more rays to consider, as you are actually rendering a multitude of views simultaneously.

Whether the surfaces are specular or diffuse isn't really relevant in regard to this statement.

To make the approach viable, radiosity performs very gross rendering, as if using large "beams"beams instead of thin rays.

The sentence says it: radiosity precomputes an "image" for all potential viewpoints at the same time, i.e. it doesn't focus on just the rays that hit a particular observer. Hence there are naturally many more rays to consider, as you are actually rendering a multitude of views simultaneously.

Whether the surfaces are specular or diffuse isn't really relevant in regard to this statement.

To make the approach viable, radiosity performs very gross rendering, using large "beams" instead of thin rays.

The sentence says it: radiosity precomputes an "image" for all potential viewpoints at the same time, i.e. it doesn't focus on just the rays that hit a particular observer. Hence there are naturally many more rays to consider, as you are actually rendering a multitude of views simultaneously.

Whether the surfaces are specular or diffuse isn't really relevant in regard to this statement.

To make the approach viable, radiosity performs very gross rendering, as if using large beams instead of thin rays.

added 87 characters in body
Source Link
user1703
user1703

The sentence says it: radiosity precomputes an "image" for all potential viewpoints at the same time, i.e. it doesn't focus on just the rays that hit a particular observer, hence. Hence there are naturally many more rays to consider, as you are actually rendering a multitude of views simultaneously.

Whether the surfaces are specular or diffuse isn't really relevant in regard to this statement.

To make the approach viable, radiosity performs very gross rendering, using large "beams" instead of thin rays.

The sentence says it: radiosity precomputes an "image" for all potential viewpoints at the same time, i.e. it doesn't focus on just the rays that hit a particular observer, hence there are naturally many more rays to consider.

Whether the surfaces are specular or diffuse isn't really relevant in regard to this statement.

The sentence says it: radiosity precomputes an "image" for all potential viewpoints at the same time, i.e. it doesn't focus on just the rays that hit a particular observer. Hence there are naturally many more rays to consider, as you are actually rendering a multitude of views simultaneously.

Whether the surfaces are specular or diffuse isn't really relevant in regard to this statement.

To make the approach viable, radiosity performs very gross rendering, using large "beams" instead of thin rays.

added 87 characters in body
Source Link
user1703
user1703

The sentence says it: radiosity precomputes an "image" for all potential viewpoints at the same time, i.e. it doesn't focus on just the rays that hit a particular observer, hence there are implicitlynaturally many more rays to consider.

Whether the surfaces are specular or diffuse isn't really relevant in regard to this statement.

The sentence says it: radiosity precomputes an "image" for all potential viewpoints at the same time, i.e. it doesn't focus on just the rays that hit a particular observer, hence there are implicitly many more rays to consider.

The sentence says it: radiosity precomputes an "image" for all potential viewpoints at the same time, i.e. it doesn't focus on just the rays that hit a particular observer, hence there are naturally many more rays to consider.

Whether the surfaces are specular or diffuse isn't really relevant in regard to this statement.

Source Link
user1703
user1703
Loading