Sun showing through objects

Started by PeanutMocha, September 01, 2012, 12:08:10 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

JasonA

#15
Once you know about the setting and where its at, its no big deal, but to me it was not intuitive where it was located.

Coming from Maya, I guess I think about light and shadows differently.  To me, I felt like the issue is about the light source being occluded by an object.  Which in turn makes me think about options like "cast shadows on/off" which Maya has.  when this came up I immediately went to the Sunlight node (which is the light source, and thus causes shadows), which to me seemed like the intuitive place to go.  When I didnt see anything there I immediately assumed this was some kind of bug.  It would have probably been awhille before I stumbled across it in the Atmosphere node.

Embrassingly, once going through the tabs on the node there was the little paragraph describing my exact situation so .. hehe doh on my part there.  ::)  But if i had my vote, id say the more intuitive mental paradigm would be since its a shadow casting/source occlusion issue, it should be on the light source.

*edit:  As I sit and think about this, it sort of creates the debate about what causes a shadow, the light or the object (I would consider an Atmosphere to be an object of sorts).  The light casts light and the object casts a shadow and if youre in the shadow, then the light obviously must be occluded. 

Anyways, just thinking aloud for friendly discussion :D 

Kadri

#16

In fact in the first place this should not happen at all.
No light should pass through objects other then transparent or clouds alike ones.

The pass through should be an option.

Martin i think you are so much in TG2 mentality (not a bad thing here)
that you sometimes forget how a beginner or other software user "feels" about these things .
This is one of the TG2 mentality things you have to know about and it is not intuitive  (as it looks to you) .
I do not remember a 3D software where a surface has a light source shine through as default .
But coding and render wise it has it place it seems in TG2 .
This is a landscape software at first and the Sun doesn't behave like this .
The artists  shouldn't hound around and make excuses because the render does this or that.
At least so much less so much better.
Does this make coding harder?
Probably! But this is not the artists problem!

Basic differences like this adds to the "TG2" is hard to use attitude unnecessarily.
As i said it is not much a problem for me too ,
this would be at the much lower part of the things to make better list.

"Please count how many digit-characters are in 6.378e+006 ? Yes 10.
Now count this 6.378.000 ? Yes more...Wait! Less... 9. Yes 9. Hmm! "


This would be a little higher on my list and only a option in the preferences Martin  :P  :)

We have still not a basic content for the beginner and-or a first time user scene .
the first default screen is an empty flat surface ...
A landscape generators first default screen should be a landscape!
I have Lightwave and it comes with its own content in a separate DVD.
A beginner can look try and learn many things just playing with those files.

This is one of the things that requires probably no coding so to speak ,
but it looks more like "this is not a problem so much" attitude on Planetside .
Because after so much years i can not think about another reason.

FlynnAD

To add to the discussion (while simultaneously agreeing with numerous comments, both regarding Maya/Max and the beginner difficulty of TG2)...

How about this for a mental strategy:

Think about if (and it does in reality) all the sky receives "God rays". But realize that if you are completely within God rays, then you don't see them. You need an object to cast shadows, and then you see God rays.

So a mountain which is in your view blocking the sun is actually causing shadows in the atmosphere where God rays are not seen. Now you don't perceive the God rays when you look at the rest of the surrounding sky because there is only sky (and then outer space).

If there were no mountain in the way, the sky (where the sun would be) would be exceptionally bright because you're looking at a nearly infinite number of parallel God rays, except that the mountain is casting shadows on the atmosphere and blocking out those specific God rays.

So, in the end, you do want the atmosphere to have the option to "receive shadows from surfaces".

-Matt

Kadri

#18

Edited my above post (Yeah got in a kinda rant direction now :) )*

jo

Hi Kadri,

You answered the reason this setting is not on by default yourself - it slows down rendering. It's not something which is always required, only when the sun is behind something. It's not a matter of coding, because obviously the renderer can handle it if you tell it to.

FWIW, I agree with you about scientific notation for numbers, I don't think it's helpful at all. We've talked about it and I hope to see it change in a future version.

We also understand the lack of sample content is a problem and will be addressing for a future version.

Regards,

Jo

Kadri


Thanks Jo , nice to hear that you want to change that numbering .

Don't get it wrong but my first post about content was 3 years ago!

I feel better now  :D

TheBadger

Quotemy first post about content was 3 years ago

So you have only been using TG2 a little longer than me, but you know it way better. This does not make me feel good :'( I should at least know it half as well, not .2% as well.  :'(
It has been eaten.

Kadri

#22

Michael  i am not sure how i should answer to your post...

I have used audio , video, 2D and 3D software since nearly 25 years as a hobby
and sometimes professionally and i used to draw in the past .
I am not quite a specialist in anything.
I am more a kind of a generalist (?) .
The software i use mostly is Lightwave actually since 17-18 years.

Here are many more TG2 users that know TG2 much deeper then i know
like Tangled-Universe and DandelO (Guys you are too many so i mentioned only 2 of you  :) ) for example.

When you begin to use the same kind of software for long years
you mostly do not begin from zero when you try another one.
I may have been using TG2 maybe only since 3-4 years but before this is at least a 15-20 year background.
So there isn't anything that you should feel bad about Michael.
You will carry all the things you learn here in TG2 , Hexagon etc. to other software
you will use in the future and the most hard part is the beginning.

You say 0.2% and that makes me think that you are very hard on yourself
because anybody who will see your models and images will certainly not look in that way.
We all see here newcomers that are here for 3-6 months
but that in so or so way give up and do not post anymore.

From your models and images that you posted i see a very bright future for you.
And i really mean it  :)

TheBadger

 ;D

Thats probably the nicest thing I have heard in many months. Thanks kadri! I actually feel better about my perceptions of how long this is taking me.
It has been eaten.