Lecture 13: Global Illumination & Path Tracing (9)
gowenong
It's interesting that the rendered picture seems more "realistic" than the photograph (which is more blurry), which factors of a camera make the picture look worse?
greeknerd1
The rendering looks the same if not even sharper than the photograph. Would we want a photo as sharp as this? Or would we prefer it to be blurrier?
Dezhang1999
These two images looks like the same, except CCD looks brighter than global illumination. How can we differentiate one to the other from the image?
somaniarushi
I have a similar question to everyone above! It seems like the depth of field is somehow greater in the global illumination rendering than the photograph. As others have mentioned, the photograph somehow looks worse. Is this perhaps because the global illumination is more accurately modeling the process of rays bouncing off various objects repeatedly and recursively, versus the photograph's ability to capture the same in a limited manner? I'd love to udnerstand this at more depth!
It's interesting that the rendered picture seems more "realistic" than the photograph (which is more blurry), which factors of a camera make the picture look worse?
The rendering looks the same if not even sharper than the photograph. Would we want a photo as sharp as this? Or would we prefer it to be blurrier?
These two images looks like the same, except CCD looks brighter than global illumination. How can we differentiate one to the other from the image?
I have a similar question to everyone above! It seems like the depth of field is somehow greater in the global illumination rendering than the photograph. As others have mentioned, the photograph somehow looks worse. Is this perhaps because the global illumination is more accurately modeling the process of rays bouncing off various objects repeatedly and recursively, versus the photograph's ability to capture the same in a limited manner? I'd love to udnerstand this at more depth!