Here are two renders of volumetric lighting in a simple scene. The first render is FireFly and the second is SuperFly, both using the same atmosphere settings in the materials room. How do i get the same shadow shafts of light on the FireFly render to the SuperFly render. The settings came from a Smith Micro Tutorial Video called "Poser - Material/Lighting 203: Volumetric Atmospheres" Which is no longer available.

Any help would be great. Thanks Pat Lane

What happens if you up the density?

You could try to use a cube primative to create the atmospheric effect around the figure with Superfly and assign the volumetric material to create the fog effect, the trick is to set the anisotropic component of the volumetric node to point along the path of the light as by default the scatter node reflects light in all directions. My vector calculus is not good enough to provide an answer to this part so below is just an example.

Superfly is based on Cycles - there is a discussion on scattering in cycles here if it helps https://blenderdiplom.com/en/tutorials/all-tutorials/582-cycles-volume-scatter.html

Thank you both. Have tried upping the density in increments of 10. The whole scene goes black after a while. Going to try ironsoul's way and look at the thread. Have noticed if i take the wall prop away SuperFly rendering does pick up very subtle shafts of light.

Thanks Pat Lane

There is, at least to my eye, a significant contrast difference between your initial FireFly and SuperFly renders, which I would initially attribute to the light intensity. Perhaps the light in FireFly is not using inverse square falloff and thus appears significantly brighter. Can you show what increasing the light intensity does?

---

My ShareCG Stuff

Verbosity: Profusely promulgating Graham's number epics of complete and utter verbiage by the metric monkey barrel.

Thanks an0malaus. The intensity slider does make a difference in the SuperFly render. The first render intensity is set to 5000 and the second render set to 8000. Unfortunately i changes the angle start and end settings. going to experiment a little more and add the wall prop back into the scene.

Thanks Pat Lane :)

It seems to be a combination of intensity and camera angles not to mention a little trickery with the wall props by angling them so to not catch the full glare of the light. What i find mind boggling is the myriad of effects created by just one single spot light in Poser. I feel confident now i can tweak it to get similar results in superfly renders as what are in FireFly. This is thanks to all who contributed to this thread. Thank you. Pat Lane :)

Great to see your results. Another thing I note from almost all of the renders I see across the board are that High Dynamic Range (required by high intensity lights) is avoided, presumably because people are used to looking at photos and renders on screens which do not accurately represent what the human eye sees. We have such amazingly complicated systems of vision that as we look around a scene in real life, our eyes and brain constantly adjust to the changing contrasts, leaving the impression/memory of the scene as that system has rendered it in our minds. But irides stop down in bright light and open up in dark, so when we look at an image on a screen, it's not at all what we would truly see, but more like what we think we saw.

Your second render at light intensity 8000 shows that overexposure effect, which more realistically represents what a bright light should do, until the eye stops down. As you've started playing with the light cone, with the intensity falloff from 100% to 0% between angle start and angle end, you could try making them the same value, or reducing angle end so less intense light is cast on the walls, then you might not need to angle them to cut diffuse reflections.

---

My ShareCG Stuff

Verbosity: Profusely promulgating Graham's number epics of complete and utter verbiage by the metric monkey barrel.