The original paper recommends 800x800 images for glare studies. Anyone have
a feeling for how hard and fast that is? Would the canonical 500x500 be
enough?
--
Randolph M. Fritz, Lighting Design and Simulation
+1 206 659-8617 || [email protected]
Hi Randolph,
as the question is general, the clear answer is no - this cannot be recommended in general. Just imagine having a 180 degree fish eye resolving the sun (or reflection of it) with 0.5 degree and having only 500x500 pixels. We made this recommendation of 800x800 10 years ago, when a) evalglare was in its first version (in the meanwhile I optimized the code which results in average to 30% time saving compared to the first versions) b) computer power was less. Nowadays I recommend 1000x1000, especially when dealing with fabrics/translucent materials with a certain peak transmission.
Another example: Imagine you want to do a electric lighting analysis with small emitting surfaces (e.g. bunch of single LEDs) of high luminances. In that case you really want to resolve the glare sources not only with 1 pixel each.
But on the other hand, there are also many cases, where you are totally fine with 500x500, when your potential glare sources are rather large.
I'm currently performing a study including images from several groups - we are having more than 1000 images and I would say in average an evalglare run was about 7s per image (using 1000x1000). The more glare sources are found in the image, the longer it takes (this has to do with the combining the "glare source pixel" to glare sources). So for a scene with a large amount of glare sources you might end up with 3-4min per image.
Jan
On 08/03/16 03:19, Randolph M. Fritz wrote:
The original paper recommends 800x800 images for glare studies. Anyone have a feeling for how hard and fast that is? Would the canonical 500x500 be enough?
--
Randolph M. Fritz, Lighting Design and Simulation
+1 206 659-8617 || [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>_______________________________________________
Radiance-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
--
Dr.-Ing. Jan Wienold
Ecole Polytechnique F�d�rale de Lausanne (EPFL)
EPFL ENAC IA LIPID
http://people.epfl.ch/jan.wienold
LE 1 111 (Office)
Phone +41 21 69 30849
Thanks. That helps.
--
Randolph M. Fritz, Lighting Design and Simulation
+1 206 659-8617 || [email protected]
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 1:38 AM, Jan Wienold <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Randolph,
as the question is general, the clear answer is no - this cannot be
recommended in general. Just imagine having a 180 degree fish eye resolving
the sun (or reflection of it) with 0.5 degree and having only 500x500
pixels. We made this recommendation of 800x800 10 years ago, when a)
evalglare was in its first version (in the meanwhile I optimized the code
which results in average to 30% time saving compared to the first versions)
b) computer power was less. Nowadays I recommend 1000x1000, especially when
dealing with fabrics/translucent materials with a certain peak transmission.
Another example: Imagine you want to do a electric lighting analysis with
small emitting surfaces (e.g. bunch of single LEDs) of high luminances. In
that case you really want to resolve the glare sources not only with 1
pixel each.But on the other hand, there are also many cases, where you are totally
fine with 500x500, when your potential glare sources are rather large.I'm currently performing a study including images from several groups - we
are having more than 1000 images and I would say in average an evalglare
run was about 7s per image (using 1000x1000). The more glare sources are
found in the image, the longer it takes (this has to do with the combining
the "glare source pixel" to glare sources). So for a scene with a large
amount of glare sources you might end up with 3-4min per image.Jan
On 08/03/16 03:19, Randolph M. Fritz wrote:
The original paper recommends 800x800 images for glare studies. Anyone
have a feeling for how hard and fast that is? Would the canonical 500x500
be enough?--
Randolph M. Fritz, Lighting Design and Simulation
+1 206 659-8617 || <[email protected]>[email protected]_______________________________________________
Radiance-general mailing [email protected]://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general--
Dr.-Ing. Jan Wienold
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL)
EPFL ENAC IA LIPID
http://people.epfl.ch/jan.wienold
LE 1 111 (Office)
Phone +41 21 69 30849_______________________________________________
Radiance-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general