2 ms·

You were told that rays from the camera would only hit what is visible to the camera. Also you might want to get upset at Nvidia, AMD, Pixar and every book on

You were told that rays from the camera would only hit what is visible to the camera. Also you might want to get upset at Nvidia, AMD, Pixar and every book on computer graphics if getting offended over spelling what you want to focus on. (Also spelling is not an approach to something)

chrisseaton 7y ago
> You were told that rays from the camera would only hit what is visible to the camera. But what is visible to the camera from rasterisation is different to what is visible to a camera using ray tracing! That was the point! > you might want to get upset at Nvidia, AMD, Pixar and every book on computer graphics if getting offended over spelling what you want to focus on You were the one who first got offended by spelling and tried to correct me to do it your way!
- BubRoss 7y ago
  >>But what is visible to the camera from rasterisation is different to what is visible to a camera using ray tracing! That was the point! That is not true. >>You were the one who first got offended by spelling and tried to correct me to do it your way! I wasn't offended, I just told you the way that it's spelled by the vast majority of people who invented and work with these things. It isn't 'my' way, I'm not sure why you are so hung up on this. Maybe you are trying to avoid answers you don't like to the incorrect assumptions in your questions.
  - chrisseaton 7y ago
    > That is not true. No it is true - a polyglon not visible in rasterisation could become visible in ray tracing if the ray passes through a refractive material. So you may need additional geometry. Get it?
    - BubRoss 7y ago
      Those are secondary rays, which are separate from the primary rays from a camera. Secondary rays from reflective or transmissive effects are not considered visibility from the camera. This distinction was very important in hybrid renderers that combined rasterization from the camera with ray tracing for secondary rays, like PRman and mental ray. Now we have the same patterns being repeated in real time rendering. This was explained to you already. You could learn something if you didn't think you knew everything already.

chrisseaton 7y ago

> You were told that rays from the camera would only hit what is visible to the camera. But what is visible to the camera from rasterisation is different to what is visible to a camera using ray tracing! That was the point! > you might want to get upset at Nvidia, AMD, Pixar and every book on computer graphics if getting offended over spelling what you want to focus on You were the one who first got offended by spelling and tried to correct me to do it your way!

BubRoss 7y ago
>>But what is visible to the camera from rasterisation is different to what is visible to a camera using ray tracing! That was the point! That is not true. >>You were the one who first got offended by spelling and tried to correct me to do it your way! I wasn't offended, I just told you the way that it's spelled by the vast majority of people who invented and work with these things. It isn't 'my' way, I'm not sure why you are so hung up on this. Maybe you are trying to avoid answers you don't like to the incorrect assumptions in your questions.
- chrisseaton 7y ago
  > That is not true. No it is true - a polyglon not visible in rasterisation could become visible in ray tracing if the ray passes through a refractive material. So you may need additional geometry. Get it?
  - BubRoss 7y ago
    Those are secondary rays, which are separate from the primary rays from a camera. Secondary rays from reflective or transmissive effects are not considered visibility from the camera. This distinction was very important in hybrid renderers that combined rasterization from the camera with ray tracing for secondary rays, like PRman and mental ray. Now we have the same patterns being repeated in real time rendering. This was explained to you already. You could learn something if you didn't think you knew everything already.