1
$\begingroup$

In PBRT 4ed

https://www.pbr-book.org/4ed/Volume_Scattering/Transmittance#eq:volume-attenuation-differential

How is this transmittance equation transformed from 11.9 to 11.10?

\begin{equation} \int_0^d \frac{dL(p + t\omega)}{dt} dt = L(p') - L(p) = \int_0^d -\sigma_t(p + t\omega) L(p + t\omega) dt \tag{11.9} \end{equation}

\begin{equation} T_r(p \to p') = 1 - \int_0^d \sigma_t(p + t\omega) T_r(p + t\omega \to p') dt \tag{11.10} \end{equation}

The book says that dividing 11.9 by L(p) gives 11.10, but the question is why deos Tr convert like that?

Since, \begin{equation} T(p \rightarrow p') = \frac{L(p')}{L(p)} \end{equation}

shouldn't the Tr inside the right integral(11.10) be Tr(p -> p +tw)?

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ I agree with you. However, 11.10 somewhat relates to the latter derivation, such as equation 11.13. The book is rather unclear about the derivation, and I am only able to get an exponential formulation, starting from 11.11. Yet I think 11.13 is correct while 11.10 is not, and if you care about this, I can post an answer about why this is so (intuitively). I recommend you file an issue on the PBR-book website github page if this is confirmed to be wrong. $\endgroup$
    – Enigmatisms
    Commented Jul 2 at 14:38
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you! @Enigmatisms. I found the original paper that derived the equation, and the difference comes from the change of variable part, which expresses the equation in the opposite direction of the light ray. cs.dartmouth.edu/~wjarosz/publications/georgiev19integral.html $\endgroup$
    – Sopiro
    Commented Jul 4 at 23:41

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.