When not all media are defined, the rule is to take the first one to fill in the subsequent gaps when there is a reflection. If a conflict arises between the eye path and the light path, the eye path is favored over the light path.
Without knowing your setup, it's hard to answer your question regarding the spot, but if the spot is aimed at the first cube and not the second one, when the light path hits the cube with the foggy exterior, it computes scattering along the path.
Regarding the camera, suppose it is aimed at nothing (the ray immediately goes to infinity), if the camera has no volume assigned, it won't compute scattering and will render black, now if you have a volume it will compute scattering and the result might catch some light, thus the more foggy look. If your light has a volume assigned, this will be mitigated by the fact that light rays might be scattered in front of the camera and bring in some light.
sphere wrote:What makes this scheme a little strange to understand is that, in real world, light wouldn't know in advance the properties of the material it is bound to hit....
sphere wrote:To visually clarify what happens (to myself and maybe to others) I've made a test, with just a cube1 (on the left) a cube2, a plane, and a spot light, The spot light is exactly equally distant from the two cubes. I've created a homogeneous volume, "fog", with some absorption and scattering. Then I've assigned the "fog" volume to the elements of the scene in the following sequence
6) cube1+cube2+plane+Spot Light
7) cube1+cube2+plane+Camera+Spot Light
leaving the other material not assigned (n.d.) to any volume type in each case.
moure wrote:If we test these and they have good results i believe we should add them as Homogeneous Volume Presets in LuxBlend , (ill add them in LuxMax too ).
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest