[fabrizio_S]

hi,
my customer asked me to simulate the light of an hotel hall (spotlight, neon etc).

Maxwell is fantastic because every light is phisical correct so it is simply to reproduce a real situation.
I can change the camera settings so I can make an image to much light or to much dark...so which are the values to reproduce what my eyes (and my customer eyes) will see in the real world?

thank you

fabrizio

[arkviz]

Hard to say, i think man's eyes are adapting sensitivity as the light amount is changing and the brightest non chromatic color is seen as 100% white. Imagine You are closed in dark chamber, no light inside and You turn on computer It is to strong light for Your eyes, whole screen is white. Try to spend few minutes outside on sunny day and turn on the same computer with the same display intesity, You may see just black screen. It is relative how exposed the image needs to be.

[fabrizio_S]

Ok, you are right but if I go in a dark room maybe my eyes are not able to see the objects but after few second (or some minute) my eys can see....so the eyes adapt the vision with the light. So it was cool if I could render not like a camera but like the eyes.

[arkviz]

I was describing situation when i wake up at 3:00 and turn on my computer.

[fabrizio_S]

A 3.00???

How many hours do you sleep?

[Bubbaloo]

Don't think of it in terms of human sight. Think of it in terms of photography. What would the camera settings be of a hallway lit like you describe?

[arkviz]

I sleep just few hours every day....

[polynurb]

...so which are the values to reproduce what my eyes (and my customer eyes) will see in the real world?

this is your thread:

http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... ht=hdr+eye

[gotoxy av-media]

http://hdrlabs.com/gallery/panogallery.html


munch

[fabrizio_S]

thans to everybody.

Your link, topic and suggest are very very interesting.


But I have some doubt again: image I am in a room with only one light, so no window with high light contrast...which is the rendering more close to reality?
I'm an architecht and some years ago I used Lightscape to simulate light of my interiors and I have to say that radiosity rendering were quite silmilar to real situations. I dont't want to say that Lightcape is better than Maxwell (Maxwell is simply the best ) but when I render with Maxwell I don't know wich values for iso or shutter speed are the best to simulate somthing close to my eyes. This is important to decide how many spotlights, bulb, neon and other lamps i have to put in my project.

bye

[macray]

to quote Insomnia (and I think something similar can be found in the manual):

http://pics.livejournal.com/macray/pic/0004thf4

[naikku]

Sorry - I deeply apologise of this offtopic thingy but...

http://hdrlabs.com/gallery/panogallery.html
munch

In Finland "Pano" means "f*ck"
So is that URL leading to some xxx-gallery?

[arkviz]

In Finland "napapiri" means polar circle, in Czech republic it means "on the paper".

[m-Que]

Sorry - I deeply apologise of this offtopic thingy but...
In Finland "Pano" means "f*ck"
So is that URL leading to some xxx-gallery?

Good to know

In Finland "napapiri" means polar circle, in Czech republic it means "on the paper"

In Czech/Slovak the word "cherstvy" when talking about bread means fresh bread, while in Russian "cherstvy" bread is old, hard bread.
There's plenty of those "sweet" words that totally change their meaning in different languages

BTW: Isn't that "kaamos" that means polar circle in Finnish... or it's 'polar night' is what is means?

PS: This thread went totally 'Off Topic'

[gotoxy av-media]

------------

back to the original topic again, this is best way for watching hdris, IMO!

munch