InfernalDarkness:
"#74 PJF states that "True Ambience is close enough to radiosity as makes no significant difference". I apologize in advance for offending you, but you couldn't be further from the truth."

I find your taking my comments out of context disappointing and frustrating, not offensive.

I also wrote in that post:
"True Ambience and radiosity are both render processes that simulate diffuse light reflections between surfaces. They work differently - but neither equates to the way real light reflects in the real world."

I'm well aware, and stated so, that the process of True Ambience is different from radiosity. I was talking about the visual result. Apart from the artefacts and errors induced by the limited implementation of True Ambience in Bryce5, the result is the same as radiosity - the appearance of realistic light bounce between surfaces.

"Bryce is a ray-tracer only, and these "rays" are not light rays in any way! They are data rays..."

No 3D graphics renderer of any sort has "light rays". These are computer programs that deal in data calculations. The mechanism of radiosity is entirely unlike the action of real light.

"...it's vastly apparent that TA was just someone's quicky workaround to making radiosity / GI effects."

If they'd only finish the job properly I'd be quite happy. If the results are good I don't really care if it doesn't meet with someone else's standard of what a "professional" program is supposed to do.