#320114
I'm posting this because I'm a bit confused about how "hidden to GI" and "hidden to camera + hidden to reflections/refractions" options are working.

Let's see some images about something similar to a pool scene where I removed two walls to see what happens under the water:

1.- A very subdivided plane with some noise applied with a water material; object hidden to GI:
Image

2.- A copy of the same plane with a material made to simulate caustics (no real caustics or refraction involved); this object is hidden to camera and to reflections/refractions:
Image

3.- Both objects together; hidden to GI object is located a bit above hidden to camera/reflections/refractions one; this is almost the result I expected (notice the real reflected caustics on the wall are missing):
Image

4.- This is the same scene as point 3 but hidden to GI object is under the other one; this is what I find odd as I expected the same as 3:
Image

Is this ok? Is it a bug?
Last edited by Fernando Tella on Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
#320121
Fernando Tella wrote:Is this ok? Is it a bug?
No, not a bug. Because the object above (hidden to reflection/refraction) won't let the rays pass through. ;)

-edit: Sorry, not Hidden to GI, I meant "Hidden to reflection/refraction" as corrected above
#320421
This is the leaf material:
http://www.ftella.com/links/Leaf.zip

In the last image the leaf plane is vertical making a dihedral; half the plane is above the water plane level (hidden to GI) and half is below.
The rays that go through the clipped part cast shadows on the floor of the pool when they go through the water object (hidden to GI).
#320423
tom wrote:Edited my first reply.
The object hidden to reflection/refraction should not block anything as it is not refracting light at all; it is an opaque object and it has a caustics-like texture acting as a clipmap to let the light through. It has the same problem as the leaf, the clipping still generates shadows when the rays goes through this hidden to GI objects.
#320428
Thank you Tom
tom wrote:Well, but I didn't know this.
Hey! This is what I wrote above the second image:
a material made to simulate caustics (no real caustics or refraction involved)
That should be enough, right? :P I think I should have been more specific. :lol:

Do you want me to send you the scene? It's pretty easy to reproduce.
Help with swimming pool water

Hi Andreas " I would say the above "fake[…]

render engines and Maxwell

Other rendering engines are evolving day by day, m[…]