(L) [2014/08/10] [ost
by MohamedSakr] [Re: how to modify light "power and color" after rendering] Wayback!@yuriks I understand [SMILEY :D] , and thanks for the example
but why it is wasteful? I think it is a just a single operation per lightGroup!!
so when you trace, you will just create multiple buffers and store each one alone, then sum them at the end of each iteration, I see it is kinda a few flops (just the addition flops for each light group) and the memory usage, I think there is no need to re-render
(L) [2014/08/10] [ost
by yuriks] [Re: how to modify light "power and color" after rendering] Wayback!If you re-render the whole image then you have the overhead of creating paths, tracing rays, sampling, calculating cosines, etc. which doesn't really vary by light but that's still being repeated anyway. If you use the light-vector approach then that's only computed once and you save on that computation. So what I mean is that yeah, it's faster using the light vector (which is equivalent to multiple buffers).
(L) [2014/08/14] [ost
by Dade] [Re: how to modify light "power and color" after rendering] Wayback!>> MohamedSakr wrote:what about camera parameters? like ISO
If you mean tone mapping (like film sensitive), it is done after the merging so it is not a problem. It is not even part of the rendering process (for instance, save in .exr and than apply to the file any kind of tone mapping you want).