The picture on the right actually works surprisingly well given that only one sample is taken. It seems that resampling this computed shadow on the surface by averaging nearby samples will give a reasonable outcome in this case.
selinafeng
Is there ever a situation where someone might prefer the picture on the right? For example, if someone wanted to use it in a certain art style would the number of samples be a hyperparameter to control? Or would the approach be to still take many samples, average it out, and then downsample to get some desired effect?
alexkassil
The picture on the right also reminds me of how something looks like through a rainy car window or a shallow puddle in a gravely area. I wonder if there is some connection to small amounts of water diffusing light and having 1 sample per pixel.
If you told me the ground was say smooth cobblestone the right picture looks realistic.
The picture on the right actually works surprisingly well given that only one sample is taken. It seems that resampling this computed shadow on the surface by averaging nearby samples will give a reasonable outcome in this case.
Is there ever a situation where someone might prefer the picture on the right? For example, if someone wanted to use it in a certain art style would the number of samples be a hyperparameter to control? Or would the approach be to still take many samples, average it out, and then downsample to get some desired effect?
The picture on the right also reminds me of how something looks like through a rainy car window or a shallow puddle in a gravely area. I wonder if there is some connection to small amounts of water diffusing light and having 1 sample per pixel.
If you told me the ground was say smooth cobblestone the right picture looks realistic.