AccuRender nXt

advanced rendering for AutoCAD

Hi, Roy, I need your advice about the settings of the translucent plastic or glass, to reproduce the "Barrissol effect".

On the pictures, I show you the faces only tagged as area lights, 10 or 20 cm behind the faces tagged as thin plastic or glass objects. The light is given by LEDs, but is not uniform.

Thanks.

Views: 925

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

You'll need to try some things.  I would start by placing area lights behind the panels, and making the panels using glass with roughness.  This should work better than making the panels themselves the light sources-- this light would be uniform in this case.  Try to limit the number of light sources if possible (it may not be.)

Let me know what you get or if you want me to take a look at a model.

Thanks Roy, That's what I was trying, but I need to put some "glow" on the glass. I would like that the glass glowes, just with the area lights, but I am at the beginning of the experience. In case, I send you the dwg, if you have some time.

Attachments:

Thanks Mario, for your advices, I'll try all these way. I'll post the result.

Put 6 smaller light sources behind the screen.  Gave the screen some thickness for better refraction by copying and offseting the surface.  Changed the screen material a little-- IOR 1.6, Roughness 1.0, Transparency .85, -- no glow.  Until you're convinced that you can't adequately model this physically, avoid all tricks such as glow or those that Mario is suggesting.

e1, BTW.  This stuff isn't working well with e4-- I need to make some changes here.

roughness is set to maximum i see, is there a way to make the material more diffuse? Maybe changing the distance between light source and screen or is there no place left? Is there any change by tagging the lights as omnidirectional or diffuse?

Not really, no-- but you can change the shape and configuration of the light sources behind the screen.  I did these quickly for illustration only.  I also only let this run for a minute or so-- things should smooth out a bit after a while.

Thanks a lot Roy. When I offset the surface, is it to simulate a solid, so do I have to tag the both as "thin", or not? The effect that my customer is looking for, is the case of the bigs disks at the ceiling. Something like this picture, but with the better lighting effect that you obtain. 

No-- don't tag it as thin.  

I increased the distance between the sources and the screen for this one.  It also uses e4 plus a tiny bit of glow to simulate the sub-surface scattering of the material which we are not going to calculate (it would take forever).  You won't be able to use e4 for yours yet, I had to make some changes here since the glow isn't working.

Put the glow in a separate channel so you can easily adjust it.  Don't get carried away with it, it is "cheating".

Thanks Mario, the illumination looks very good. I'm going to take a look on your file. Thanks for the time you spend on it.

Thanks Mario. I see, with your help, that omni light are better for this case. And my question to Roy: Why? What is the difference in the functioning betwen area or diffuse, and omni? The "area" picture is not finalized, but its enough to see the difference...

The omni light distributes light equally in all directions.

The area light distributes light based on its direction vector (straight down by default-- but an editable setting).  The light is only distributed in one hemisphere and the intensity decreases at glancing angles using the cosine with respect to the direction vector.

Thanks a lot Roy. I understand, now, why the light is stronger in the space between two surfaces (close enough) tagged as omni, but not in the case of the area light.

RSS

Search

Translate

Latest Activity

Roy Hirshkowitz replied to roberto sacchetti's discussion memory problem
"Yeah-- something has clearly gone wrong.  It's just not running out of memory, though-- not in the old sense (which it could easily do on 32 bit systems.)"
3 hours ago
Roy Hirshkowitz replied to roberto sacchetti's discussion memory problem
"The user mode virtual address space limit on 64 bit windows (the statistic we probably care most about here) is actually 8TB or 8192GB.  All of that must be backed by swap file space which would likely be the limiting factor here.  That…"
3 hours ago
Jorge Javier Lara Domínguez posted a discussion

Hola amigos...

Hola amigos, les dejo un link con mis ultimos trabajos. Felices fiestas, bendiciones para todos!!!https://www.facebook.com/N3dArquitecturaDigitalSee More
5 hours ago
roberto sacchetti replied to roberto sacchetti's discussion memory problem
"good morningI did a bit of evidence:1- I increased the page file windows to 25000 mb and kept giving me error2-I split between layers in the parking lot (front, center back), and also render individually gave me error3-I started to delete objects…"
8 hours ago
mike makki replied to roberto sacchetti's discussion memory problem
" hi george i did a render 3 years a ago for harvester restaurant where i needed to show rpc people eating ,walking in ,standing etc....i could only put about 13 of them.....then i tried 15...i got the message roberto got....i took it down to 13…"
17 hours ago
George Ioannidis replied to roberto sacchetti's discussion memory problem
"According to Micro$oft the memory limit of Windows 7 pro 64 bit is 192GB on physical memory. I doubt anyone could ever produce model that big. I remember one of my "heaviest" model I ever did with particle grass translated into mesh…"
18 hours ago
mike makki replied to roberto sacchetti's discussion memory problem
"i dont hink so roy....the more objects the more memory...."
18 hours ago
roberto sacchetti replied to roberto sacchetti's discussion memory problem
"I have a 1tb hdd, so I can increase the swap file size. How do I know which object is damaged rpc ???? are many: plants, people, cars ..... or I have to go to attempts?"
yesterday

© 2014   Header image courtesy Peter Milner   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service