Should it say: Outgoing radiance from light point p'? (instead of p)
VioIchigo
@RichardChen9 Yes, I think it should be p'.
ellenluo
In the picture, how is theta prime and the light surface normal (A prime) determined? Would we get the normal from a vertex or a face of the surface?
eliot1019
Looks like theta prime is determined by using the dotted line from p to p'.
yzyz
More specifically, θ′ is the angle between the light surface normal and ω′. If A′ is some 3D mesh, then there could be multiple ways of determining what the surface normal at a particular point should be. We could just use the face normal, or we could also use vertex normals like we did in assignment 2.
GitMerlin
I'm quite confused on why do we need to consider the normal of the light source now.
It seems that previously when we were naively doing Solid Angle Sampling from every direction, we didn't worry about the angle of light source.
Should it say: Outgoing radiance from light point p'? (instead of p)
@RichardChen9 Yes, I think it should be p'.
In the picture, how is theta prime and the light surface normal (A prime) determined? Would we get the normal from a vertex or a face of the surface?
Looks like theta prime is determined by using the dotted line from p to p'.
More specifically, θ′ is the angle between the light surface normal and ω′. If A′ is some 3D mesh, then there could be multiple ways of determining what the surface normal at a particular point should be. We could just use the face normal, or we could also use vertex normals like we did in assignment 2.
I'm quite confused on why do we need to consider the normal of the light source now.
It seems that previously when we were naively doing Solid Angle Sampling from every direction, we didn't worry about the angle of light source.