Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?ForumID=107&Form.ShowMessage=775196&Form.sess_id=2047682&For

First a little background. The attached link is of the best model of Global Illumination I've seen to date. Secondly lets recap how Poser 5's Light Setup is, and see if we ca'nt visualize, at least for a moment, how the Bryce model could be replicated in Poser 5. The 1 light is positioned at 0,0,0, in the left image. The Y and X coordinates mark where the light will move if you slide that light's coresponding Transform(Movement) Dial posotively or negatively. Once the the Y position has been moved from 0 the Z Transform dial becomes functional. The Z Transform Dial will force the light to circle around the Y=0 point, 360 degrees. As shown by the contrast between image 2 and 3 the more the Y Transform is offset from 0, the Larger(And we'll get to this in an argument...) distance the Z's Transorm Dial's 360 degrees will actually cover. = )

In order to copy the Bryce model I added as many lights adjacent to a light at 0,0,0 as I could. The result was 6 new lights(The pink ones.) I then counted how many lights I could stack from 0,0,0 before I place a light on the Y's 90th degree equator. The result was 4(As represented in the differentiating color scheme.) So, as you can see, in the images above, I added 4 rows of 6 lights to the light at 0,0,0, to form a half-dome/sphere of Global Illuminmation.

Finally, before I set each row and each light in each row uniformly seperate, I'd like to critique this model and get any feedback anyone may have. I believe there is more light per sq. inch at the top of the dome. Therefore the lights at the top of the dome will need to be dimmed. I have a couple Pythons I was given with falloff and brightness value/percentage functions which will effect all of the lights at once, but I'll be horn swaggled to think there is'nt a more uniform way to just covere the surface of this sphere with lights. My problem is I ca'nt think this through mathmatically. Can anyone visualize, or know, of how this could be accomplished, in order to have the same # of lights per square iota of globe surface at any given square surface coordinates?

= )

sounds interesting :) do you have a testrender with that lightset? Chris

"It Is Useless To Resist!" - Darth Vader

Not just yet, but I promise to post one before I'm finished with this thread. I even have a Pythons, from Ockham, that will set all of the lights to the color and intensity of the selected light. I need to get handy with Python though. I just requested, of him, a Bi-Polar Falloff Python. The falloff script he's given me is Uni in that it's changes will affect whichever light is selected, as a pole, then increas or decrease it's change as it moves towrd the opposite pole. I figure there is X too much light at 0,0,0 and it's opposite pole, and Y(0) just the right light at the equator. Therefore a falloff Python with a -100 to 100 parameter, set to -50(With the light at 0,0,0 selected), should cut the lights at either pole in half, and then leave the lights at the equator alone...At least I think cutting each pole by 50% is whats called for...Anyhow this would be how you could run the falloff script so as not to effect beyond the equator. = )

I'd also like to spend some time perfecting the spacing between the lights in the set. Right now they are all present and roughly in thier correct spot, but not mathmatically... = )

oh man ... that sounds all greek for me :) I think I have to more into that light things :) looking forward for your testrender :) Chris

"It Is Useless To Resist!" - Darth Vader

^_^

Uhm... included with the V3 hair (I think it was with the ha at least) there's a Global illumination light. Works really good and looks something like yours, only with all the lights set to a fairly dark grey.

so far so good :-)

ernyoka1 - Did V3 hair come with V3, or was this a seperate puchase? = )

!

Un coup de dés jamais n'abolira le hazard
S Mallarmé

Looks sound to me cainbrogan. I always made global illumination in Poser just by splittlg the degrees, basically a light placed every 22.50 degrees in every direction. When I went larger, every 11.25 degrees. Of course to do all this, you have to type it all in with the dials. But, as you mention, the rub is always that point where the lights converge, and there is too much light. AgentSmith

Contact Me | Gallery | Freestuff | IMDB Credits | Personal Site
"I want to be what I was when I wanted to be what I am now"

22.50, 45.00, 67.50, 90.00, etc.

Contact Me | Gallery | Freestuff | IMDB Credits | Personal Site
"I want to be what I was when I wanted to be what I am now"

To help with the problem of too much light, I would just change the intensity of the lights as each level went up, the bottom level was at 100%, then 90, 80, 70, 60 and the top one light at 50%. It's definetly not the true solution, but it helped somewhat. AgentSmith

Contact Me | Gallery | Freestuff | IMDB Credits | Personal Site
"I want to be what I was when I wanted to be what I am now"

AgentSmith - Ockham is definatley the man to honor here, as I explained, the fallof Script he gave me does that changing from any selected pole. Moreover Ockham just replied with the Bi-Polar Intensity and Color Falloff Script I mentioned! Then he informed me Python should be able to space lights perfectly. I just requested he try this, and asked if it could determine the max. number of lights, if it could determine which numbers of lights would fit best denominatorily(You know when you hae to find a common denominator to fit fractions into for some mathmatics,) or if we could try both? = )

Cool beans, making 3D a better, brighter place, lol. Would love to see your results one day! AS

Contact Me | Gallery | Freestuff | IMDB Credits | Personal Site
"I want to be what I was when I wanted to be what I am now"

Once this(these) new light set(s) are finished, I'll have the superb oppurtunity to sit down with all of his Pythons and become much more familiar with thier useage. I'll then be able to better tell of each, and maybe write a few tuts! = )

Getting things evenly spaced is known mathematically as a "packing problem". I know there are formulas for covering an entire sphere with evenly placed centers for much smaller spheres, which would eliminate your convergence problem and the resultant need to modify each and every light source's strength. That particular reference was in a ScienceNews article a couple years back, so I don't have it at my fingertips. A web search on "packing problem" ought to turn up this example though. Carolly

Attached Link: http://www.applied-synergetics.com/ashp/html/domes.html

Search on 'geodesics.' R. Buckminster Fuller worked all this out in Synergetics. You could scale a geodesic sphere up to the radius you want the lights at, and place one light at each vertex. You can get Dome 4.80, a utility to generate any arbitrary sphere at http://www.applied-synergetics.com/ashp/html/domes.html. Thanks for asking.

Ockham just delivered his CreateLights.py. I am surrently testing it for sweet spots. My suspicions of needing the right common denominators was right. I may have also found a bug. I'll post my results once I have a few things to show! = )

Well I found some bugs in the first version of Ockhams Global Illumination Python, but here are some shots of a few interesting sets. They need some refining though. The total light count does'nt reflect the number of rows evenly. That is you ca'nt divide the toal number of lights, by the number of rows and expect a whole number, I'll be working on that later today. I'll keep everyone posted as we go... = )

LOL..o my god that's a lot of lights.... Keep us posted o masochistic renderer. ;o) AS

Contact Me | Gallery | Freestuff | IMDB Credits | Personal Site
"I want to be what I was when I wanted to be what I am now"

I'm going to chip away at the 342, but with Ockham's Python it was so easy to do, I had to try it! I'll be back with more! = )

.

342 lights?!? What are you doing... Gandalf at the bridge?

Um.... do you guys mind not disecting my light set? Thanks. Anton

-Anton, creator of ApolloMaximus: 32,000+ downloads since 3-13-07
"Conviction without truth is denial; Denial in the face of truth is concealment."

NEW The Poser FaceInterMixer

hauksdottir - Thanks for posting, would you elaborate on ".", with maybe a full letters, a word, or more? Gandolf at the Bridge...Haha! No, like I said this Python is so easy to use, I tried 360, to see what would happen, and this was the result. Pretty interesting though no? I'm putting together a small render farm, and should be able to do some...testing with it, eventually! PheonixRising - Actually you had nothing to do with this effort...untill now. These sets were created entirely by myself with Python Scripting from Ockham. They may or may not make it to the Marketplace. I'll be need some Advertising/Free Content for my site as soon as I larn how to use IIS. Though I did just check out your Artist Page and DL'd the sets I believe you are refering to. = )

.

Is this just to get updates for this post? = )

Yes.

Contact Me | Gallery | Freestuff | IMDB Credits | Personal Site
"I want to be what I was when I wanted to be what I am now"

I created the lightsets for Daz described above. I am sure you have done this on your own. But then the details on my lights mentioned here in the pics and post above is what I am refering to. Anton

-Anton, creator of ApolloMaximus: 32,000+ downloads since 3-13-07
"Conviction without truth is denial; Denial in the face of truth is concealment."

NEW The Poser FaceInterMixer

Why were you thinking we were going to dissect anything? I'd appreciate a few posted pics of your light sets, as I asure you none of the images I've posted were of your work. BTW - Do they come with V3, or are they a seperate purchase? Any product links would be nice! = )

http://store.daz3d.com/catalog/product.php?pidx=1944&paridx=151 Post #13

-Anton, creator of ApolloMaximus: 32,000+ downloads since 3-13-07
"Conviction without truth is denial; Denial in the face of truth is concealment."

NEW The Poser FaceInterMixer

Anton, I think they are talking about the Global light that came with the Bombshell hair for Vicky 3. Anyway, doesn't matter.

I made those lightsets

-Anton, creator of ApolloMaximus: 32,000+ downloads since 3-13-07
"Conviction without truth is denial; Denial in the face of truth is concealment."

NEW The Poser FaceInterMixer

Poor Anton, thinks he's getting ripped off...

Well, I've been giving our Pythons some thought, and have come up with a couple new premises. The first was to set the top light, of the set I have thats very similar to post #13, to half of what the values of the lights at the equator are. And then transfer that gradient change through the rows of lights in between. Lets say the equatorial row is at a value of 160. Because I see the that row as half way away from the over powered lights at the top of the sphere, I'd change the top lights to 80. The differeance there was 80. 80 iotas divided by 4 rows(From the N. Pole.) equals a gradual change of 20 per row(See above pic.) The only problem I see with this at this change needs to be dynamic. If I were to use Ockhams LightIntensity.py(Which changes all lights a given percentage.) the aspect ratio between the rows would change. Thus I'm inclined to aquire a new script, just for this set, that will changes the color or intensity of all the lights at once, but at the ratio mentioned in my previous example!

My other premise has to do with dice, particulary those used by people familiar with the role playing game Dungeons and Dragons, in which 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 20, and 100 sided dice are used. Any of the dice can be enclosed in a perfect sphere so that each point of the die makes contact with the surface of the sphere. A python to generate a new die for each # number of requested lights, then make that transfer is what I've posed to Ockam last. I also suggested a toggle to keep point 0,0,0 static should be added.

= )

I have a question for everyone. Not the picture on the right in post 2, then the pic. in post 13. To get the lights to change this way I need to move the camera's Y Orbit. But the last time I tried this I noticed I was underneath the ground plane looking up. Granted I could have turned of the ground shadow and repositioned my object, but I can think of many instances this would'nt be optional. How are light sets rotated around in general? = )

To my knowledge there is no way to move lights as a group. Each light would have to be moved individually using it's X/Y/Z Rotate Dials. Unless someone could come up with a Python script to do it.

Getting back to my dice theory for a moment. What do we think would be better translating each die's sides, points, or both. Any ideas on how? I'm going to duck into my schools math lab and try to figure this out. I'd much rather have a Python to do this, for any number of lights, than just do a bunch of static sets, though any input on how the translation could come, would be appreciated! = )

.

I'm convinced that preparing Global Illumination models should develop from mapping the sides of dice to the surface of the sphere.

Imacen - Thanks for the link!

The first hurdle I see here is learning of how dice are created. My first hope is that a die can be generated with any number of sides greater than 4. I just posted a question about this over at the site Imacken linked to earlyer, at http://www.applied-synergetics.com/ashp/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2#2.

The second hurdle is at mapping the center of each side of each die to a coordinate on the surface of the Light Control Sphere.

While we're waiting for the more advanced formulae input of hurdle 1, let's start in on the second hurdle by taking on the 4 sided die as a warmup. In the above pic. are the images of the usual D&D(Dungeons and Dragons) dice I've been mentioning. The "4 Sided" is the one in the middle. Side 1 is easy, we can plot it at 0,0,0. But then where the other 3 lights go is questionable. My first instinct is to divide the 180 degrees, from the top of the sphere to the bottom, by the number of sides we have in the shape(180 / 4 = 45, 180 - 45 = 135.) Thus we could use the latitudinal line at 135 by dividing it's 360 degrees, of Z rotation, by the number of sides left to plot (360 / 3 = 1 light every 120 degrees.) But then I think ahead to the model of the 6 sided. The 4 planes of its "Sides" would make contact with the surface of the sphere at the equator(The 90th latitude). This makes me ask what is divided by 4 to get 90. The answer of 360, transfered back to the model of the 4 Sided, would mean we should have used the 120th line of latitude(360 / the 3 three sides of the 4 Sided = the 120 latitude). I tend to lean toward this second theory, as with it we come up with 120 degrees twice, though I'm not proof posotive that it is perfect. And would actually like a better formula, as all die shapes wo'nt be as easy as finding just one line of latitude aside from 0,0,0...

= )

I've been poking WinDome, the application I got from the link Imacken provided. It's a close call, but I do'nt think its made to generate dice. Take a look at the above pic. This was produced by WinDome, as a Frequency 20(20 Sided die...?) Full Sphere, but as you can see be the slight bend in the color differentiations, that this shape is balanced to roll as a die. = )

Hmm, I should have run that highlight straight through the equator of that last example, oh well... = )

The height of a equilateral tringle is the length of a side times the square root of 3 divided by 2(.866 if the origional side was a length of 1.) Picture for a second the pyramid resting on its base with one of the bases points facing you. If we were to travel around the 0 line of longtitude we would pass two height lengths and one side length. 360 divided by three would be 120 per length, but remember 2 sides are .866 the 120 degrees. So really we have two height lengths that span 103.92 degrees and one side length that spans 152.16 degrees. Plotting each light to 0,0,0 and then moving it from there the 4 lights ended up at X=52, Y=0, Z=0, X=-52, Y=0, Z=0, X=0, Y=128, Z=0, and X=0, Y=-128, Z=0. But because I hav'nt found a Light Set Rotator, I then need to rotate the X axis of my Main Camera and my M2 Model -141 degrees, to get the light set to shine as in the above render.

This image was rendered with all of M2's materials set to Middle gray, and with each light set to a Middle Gray Intensity Value of 120, and with much postwork done with Photoshop's Levels

I left a few decimal points out of this explanation, but Poser has a bad habit of not keeping these exactly where you left them, so thought the set may not Perfect it's reallly close...and you can see that in many of the highlights. BTW - The postion of each of these lights is supposed to be indicative of where the center of each of the planes of the pyramid would make contact with surface of a sphere.

= )

I do not feel that I am being ripped off but I would appreciate detailed info on the light set up not being detailed here. Saracsm isn't neccesary.

-Anton, creator of ApolloMaximus: 32,000+ downloads since 3-13-07
"Conviction without truth is denial; Denial in the face of truth is concealment."

NEW The Poser FaceInterMixer

Then I'll let you in on whatever it is that has you spooked, but your gonna have to speak up! I told you the first set I posted was just a pyramid stacking theory, and have named the author of the script the other sets were direived from. Else, I hav'nt appreciated your entrance into this post assuming skullduggery, and ask you to retract that statement, without any basis for presumption. = )

I never said I was addressing you. You assumed that. If you want a private post I suggest you use email.

-Anton, creator of ApolloMaximus: 32,000+ downloads since 3-13-07
"Conviction without truth is denial; Denial in the face of truth is concealment."

NEW The Poser FaceInterMixer

As author of this post it's my pleaseure to see through its development. Anything you say in here is reply to my Subject. If you're assumptions have been dispelled, then so be it, but I request, as such, you retract your intitial entry to my discussion. Else, just do'nt say anything further if you hav'nt got anything legitimately/technically relavant to contribute. Regards, cainbrogan = )

This one was a give me. Again I just kept plotting 0, 0, 0, and then moving from there. You only need to move one parameter of each light. The moves were to X=180, X=90, X=-90, Y=90, Y=-90. Then I put 0, 0, 0 back to represent the 6th light.

I've noticed from experience it's best not to make mug shots. M2 is a man, and deserves ambidextrous lighting, so I've roted he and the main cam 45 degrees, a light on either side of him, rather than one overpowering lamp directly in front of him.

I'm a little partial to the first render of this set though. I think that is because of the high position of the lights in fron of him vs. this render which has lights about mid waist. I was going to do a little more rotating, but the M2 model was'nt taking too kindly to my not having a Python for light set rotation...

Next is the 8 sided...

= )

Here's the 8 sided die. Kind of a cross between 4 and 6. I really lik the lighting of the upper half of M2 in with D4... = )

Here's the 8 sided die. Kind of a cross between 4 and 6. I really lik the lighting of the upper half of M2 in with D4. Again this image was render with all lights at %100, %50 intensity, with all M2's MATs set to middle gray. = )

Here's the 10 sided die. If you do'nt recognize it that is because its resting on its side still, it was easyer to put it together this way. I'm going to rotate the Main Camera, and M2, 90 degrees along the X axis and rerender. I would try to set it as it rests after it's been rolled, so that a side points straight up, but this is difficult without a script to rotate the lights... = )

I got bored with my Dice theory and decided to jump ahead for a moment. This model is a takeoff on the 6 sided. I noticed that the 6 sided has light every 90 degrees, if you always travel N,S,E or W. So I decided to cut the angle down to 45. This raised the number of lights in the set from 6 to 25. Has anyone noticed these renders getting particulary more difficult to work with as the light count has increased. I had'nt noticed how each new light set has lost much of metalacity present in the post before. I wonder why this is happening? I noticed because getting this image through photoshop has been a particularly difficult task. I had to try several different light levels, MAT shades, and then go over the Highlight Size option. I'd never done this before. I guess lighting was a really good place to start picking up on Poser's more intricate features... The image above took me about as long to get to, probably, as the two that came before it. You can tell its really far from complete, but I guess this is what its all about. Yeah, I said that! = )

I see what you mean about the loss of metalacity. I think it's more of a result of the texture/reflection map you are using than the lights. As you add more lights the contrast between highlight and shadow decreases, giving the model a more uniform tone. You should try using a true reflective material on the model. You will retain your metalacity throughout. I have a few in the freebie section, just add your own reflection map to them.

MY 'puter is on the blink right now, I got a naster virus, and now P5 wo'nt load. I'm gearing up now for an FDISK. As soon as all my important directories are burnt to CD, I'm going can this virus all at once! How 'bout inspiration, is there a future for this post? I noticed I've been the adding posotive data, but not recieving many replies... There are only a few dice left, but if nobody is reading... = )

I'm reading. Don't know about the logic, yet. But it's certainly interesting. Sorry about the virus. I hope you get back up fast. Cheers Q

Un coup de dés jamais n'abolira le hazard
S Mallarmé

How much longer does the lighting for each set take (will this be usable?) for an increased number of lights? And how does it compare against other lighting setups (Is a customised setup better than a mathematical model) in a scene? But very interesting to see lighting setups done by python (which I know nothing about!) Just my 0.02

quixote - I think of logic as the procees of imagining formulas. So far we've mentioned: Pyramid Stacking, Ockham's Python, Die Replication, and Pole/Compass Extremities Division. FireHorse - The 12 sided should'nt take too long, it will be much like D8 and D10. D20, and any other suggestions..., are going to take a little longer though. I think the way to do it will be to divide the 180 of lontitude by 4, and the place a light every 72 degrees. Thanks for adressing quixotes question of Logic. I think useablility is a matter of mathmatics! Though I do'nt understand Ockhams Math, I'd consider the rest of the theories presented in this post as worth having at. And would like to hear from anyone who has any other formulae. = )

cainbrogan: Don't mind me. My logic is way out there, anyways. Working in cell clusters does replicate certain real life situations, both in studio and out. And that is of great interest to me. But I'm from the old school: 1. Global illumination, although useful, at times and an interesting math model to wrestle with, is not very appealing. 2. a photographer or cinematographer writes with light. It is his responsability to create the lighting set-up that will bring his scene to life. Every scene should therefore require it's own approach and model. Having said that, I know that this is not what the thread is about. Fostering a better understanding of such a complex subject in the context of the Poser interface is commendable and I, for one, have learned something. Bravo, and please don't mind me. I only posted to let you know that someone was still monitoring this thread. Cheers, Q

Un coup de dés jamais n'abolira le hazard
S Mallarmé

I know you've done a global illumination based on a complete sphere. In the cases where 'below ground' does not need to be illuminated, would it be an idea to develop a lighting scheme in the top half of the sphere? This would reduce the number of lights. It would also be interesting to compare the lighting from some existing freebie lighting setups to a 'global illumination' setup for a figure and/or scenes. If say, out of 5 different scenes, global illumination worked well enough (almost as good as an indivually hand tweaked lighting setup), it may be useful as a general lighting setup for newbies ... like me :-) But if global illumination turned out to be the worst lighting in every case then it might be best left as a learning exercise in programming in python! :-)

quixote - Thank you very much! I see where the where an artist needs to "Write with Light." Every work needs to have its own character. I'm glad you're keeping tabs on my attempts to suppliment this belief with mathmatical basis'! FireHorse - That's really the half of choice here, but truthfully I'm not really sure where that is. I'd always thought the front of the Ligth Controls(0,0,0) was the front of the scene. But recently, while working at acquiring Set Rotation Formulae/Pythons, I've come to relaize that beliefe is off some, but I'm still not sure how this is. As I said to quixote I think Global Illumination makes for a wonderfull base. This way you really get some thing to start each scene off with! Then if we can get you rotating/coloring/dimming the set(s), with Pythons, we will have definatley accelerated the scene creation process! Unless your working with only 1 or 2...lights, for a very unique effect, I think your always want to see as much of the surface of each of you models as possible. THis is where Global Illumination is paramount. The differance between them being how much tweaking you a prepared to perform for the final render. Sometimes, for quick renders, the 4 sided model will blanket the surface smoothly/evenly enough. For a smoother and more consistant cover of a models surface you would want to use a set with more sources though. So there is room for expirimention from right within the mathmatical realm of the Global Sets via the relationship between intensity and source number! Well it happened folks. After installinf Win2KPro IIS, and not any patches or Virie protection, and even without having hosted a site yet, the Code Red Nimda disease took the life of my PC! I backed up as much as I could before I needed to FDISK and reformat my HD. Unfortunetly, not all of my Libraries made it to CD-R. I though I had backed up my lights sets, but this was not the case. I've contacted ockham about replacing some of what he has copies of, but I'm sure all of my die sets were lost. I'm going to start back up again tonight, but it might be a week, or so, before I post with any new die sets... = )

Sorry to hear about Code Red. I suppose you need to reinstall offline?!? ... turn off the server stuff ... Stick all the protection you've got before going back on the internet! ... Just thinking out loud, in between the regular lighting sets, there will be some lighting sets that are not regular whereby you might get an overlap e.g. placing lights at every 25 degrees or 15 degrees. These won't be totally symmetrical but ... if the new python program can handle it then it would give us some in between options rather than just going from 22.5 to 11.25 degrees ... a compromise on eveness of lighting and the number of lights required to achieve it. ... or a user can put in the number of lights wanted as some parameter and then the program could do it's best global lighting for the specified number of lights. Just some ideas :-)

I think 45 degrees is as close as you can come without overlapping. This posed a significant difficulty passing through Photoshop 7. I think sets in between at and total overlapping of the Light Control Sphere may not be lucrative. I just got some .PYs from Ockham today, I'll be going over them tomorrow. I know I forgot to mention this before, but the light set generator I mentioned in post#21 has a rhyme and reason to it. It only generates lights of a power. That is to say sets with 1(11,) 4(22,) 9(33,) 16(44,) etc. = )

I posted a free globalillumination lightset for poser a while ago. It uses the same principal as the bryce lightdomes only there are less lights. It's only 20kb. so don;t let the size stop you.

That was the first thing I DL'd when I became interested in this a few weeks ago, thanks! I just have one problem though, the set does'nt look uniform at all. Would you check the file being DL'd to make sure its what you intended people to use? I'm not saying I did'nt make any nice renders with it, but the Light Control U.I. looks a bit jumbly. = )

Ok I've just about recovered from that virus, but I'm rnning into the same problem. The more lights that are added the less attractive each point is! It is even more evident with the use of skin maps. Does anyone have any real advice? = )

This is really a huge drawback to Global Illumination, no matter how sound the geometry is. I'd at least like to venture as fgar as to learn why. You would'nt think more light would cause less visual stimulation. I think this is a major drawback to Poser 5! = )

Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL

Subject: Global Illumination Logic