1070

submitted 11 months ago by bbpolterGAYst to c/196

180 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world 34 points 11 months ago

I'm surprised they didn't go with the fact that ray tracing shoots rays out of the camera rather than having light radiate from light sources.

"That's a scientifically outdated view of how light works! Light enters your eyes, not the other way around! What is this? Emission theory? Are we back in the 1600s? They've played us for absolute fools."

[-] Pulptastic@midwest.social 12 points 11 months ago

That's clever. Only trace the rays that the camera can see and probably cheaper to send some rays from the camera to the sun than vice versa.

[-] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 13 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Exactly ! this makes the problem potentially millions of times easier, since you know with certainty that every ray fired is going to contribute to the image, whereas firing rays from the light source would guarantee you never see most of them, the processing power is wasted and your image never converges