Monday, June 27, 2011

photon mapping vs path tracing outdoor test


So yea photon mapping doesn't handle biger scenes very well.

Glass is farily good (good caustics makes up for crap direct ilumination, I trace 5m photons every pass here, perhaps if I lowered that number I would get better direct lighting and antialiasing, but worse indirect lighting).

Photon mapping:


Path tracing:


Lambert material, photon mapping (without direct lighting computed separately):


Photon mapping with direct lighting:


Path tracing:


As expected path tracing performs better, maybe some fine tunning (photons per pass and initial radius) would help, but I don't expect miracles.

Posted by at
Labels: , , ,

4 comments:

  1. AnonymousJune 27, 2011 at 4:33 PM

    Nice comparison :), I think it is interesting if we can invent a method to automatically pick the best integrator for a given scene...

    ReplyDelete
  2. PL01July 25, 2011 at 2:39 PM

    Hi Michael,

    Have you ever try to path-trace your "cornell-box + water" scene ? and compare it with your PPM ?

    Krys

    ReplyDelete
  3. MichalJuly 25, 2011 at 11:05 PM

    Hi,

    After trying for < 1h I felt like rendering that scene with traditional path tracing wouldn't get any good even after overnight session.

    But um, right now I'm kinda busy with college and work, so I gotta get back to it some time.

    Best regards

    ReplyDelete
  4. PL01July 26, 2011 at 11:57 AM

    I have try it :-) It was completely delirious... even after 16h of rendering :-)

    But it is interesting to show the difference !

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)