Page 1 of 2

Sun control

Posted: Sun Jun 26, 2005 12:27 am
by iandavis
I understand that with a physical sky simulation that sun position based on time and date is a reasonable model to adopt...

however, am I the only one whom hates it?

This model should be an option not the rule.

a simple heading/ascension should be available too. From the ground plain... 0 degrees being due north, 180 being due south, etc.

from the horizon line, 90 being the zenith and 0 degrees being the horizon.


Anyone who thinks this to be a silly request I dare you to make a scene and then ask the sun to be at the direct zenith. Ok, now how long did it take you? Where in the world, and what time of the year does the sun actually stand at the zenith... ummm... I haven't a clue.

However, by typing in 0,180 I could position the sun exactly there... time taken? .00001 seconds. Or for standard scene lighting a 45 degree by 270 would put the sun exactly right for product shots. Plus it's easily adjusted for quick renders and client request fulfillment.

Also, due to the way the sun travels through the sky it's darn-near impossible to do a series of renders with the sun changing position as if it's rotating around the object.

Ian.

Posted: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:36 pm
by Hervé
fourth :D

Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 7:01 am
by adk
fifth ;)

Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 12:40 am
by hdesbois
seventh, really!
HD

Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 2:46 am
by mverta
Make it an either/or... real-world sun, or manually adjusted

Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 6:51 am
by bathsheba
mverta wrote:Make it an either/or... real-world sun, or manually adjusted
Yes please! The only people who ever benefit from the current model are architects, and even they only benefit in specialized situations. Most people are not designing skyscrapers.

-Sheba

Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 6:44 pm
by Kabe
Well, though I like the idea of sun simulation - or more exact sky simulation - a lot, i think the mayor grieves with the current situation come from a bug:
The sun simulation system just doesn't work as it is supposed to, so it's useless to architects as well:
http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4229

As I posted on the Cinema list, I think that the sun should be part of an seperate environment object anyway, not part of the render settings:
http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4310

It should be fairly easy to let the user decide if she or he wants a sun position calculation (with bugs fixed), or set the own values for whatever artistic reasons.

So I second that - but first I want the simulation fixed so it looks right.

Actually that was how I found out that it was broken: It just didn't look right. Sometimes the eye is a wonderful instrument ;-)

Kabe

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 4:24 am
by true
Agree, agree~~ 8)

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 5:29 am
by n1tram
Well you got a point there... After all CG and maxwell is all about lies. We are all trying to convinve others that these are real photos :lol:

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 8:13 pm
by mgroeteke
yes please - may the simulation remain as option.

markus

Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 10:57 pm
by def4d
I remember in Bryce the possibility to place the sun where you click in viewport, it's sometimes usefull.

Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 11:07 pm
by Maxer
This is a great point and I don't see how this breaks the rules as far as being an unbiased renderer goes. :D

Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 11:15 pm
by Tyrone Marshall
Maxer wrote:This is a great point and I don't see how this breaks the rules as far as being an unbiased renderer goes. :D
How's this:

Screen shot from C4D SkyShader plugin:

Image

Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 11:19 pm
by Maxer
That's very cool.....what is it?

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 11:52 am
by andronikos916
thanx Tyrone for the plugin tip...

cy,
Andron