Dear,
I want to post to this list.
Thanks,
Urtza.
Hi,
I am wondering how to calculate Annual Sunlight Exposure "ASE" and Spatial
Daylight Autonomy "SDA" for educational spaces in hot-arid climate of Iran.
I truly appreciate.
Best Regards
That’s a very broad question! I notice you’ve posted your question to the radiance-daysim specific mailing list which may not have as many subscribers as the radiance-general mailing list. What type of computer system are you using (Windows, Mac, Linux)? Do you have familiarity with other Radiance related tools in addition to Daysim? If so, have you tried searching the archives:
http://www.radiance-online.org/community/mailing-lists/search-1
If you’re specifically set on using Daysim, are you using a particular subset or plug-in from here:
http://daysim.ning.com/page/overview-of-daysim-plug-in-capabilities
···
From: Sepideh Korsavi [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 1:59 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Radiance-daysim] (no subject)
Hi,
I am wondering how to calculate Annual Sunlight Exposure "ASE" and Spatial Daylight Autonomy "SDA" for educational spaces in hot-arid climate of Iran. I truly appreciate.
Best Regards
____________________________________________________________
Electronic mail messages entering and leaving Arup business
systems are scanned for acceptability of content and viruses
Hi Patrik,
probably your C++ compiler isn't defining "__cplusplus" by default.
Therefore you should define it manually or remove the ifdef's around
the "extern "C"-line" and the corresponding "}" in the headers you are
using.
Hope this helps!
Christian
Hi all,
I'll try to build a Viewer like RShow for Windows. For this I've included
several files from the "src" path to my C++ project (the files mentioned in
the "filefmts.pdf"). The compiling seems to works but I still has a linking
error:
Linker-Vorgang l�uft...
Bibliothek ../bin/TKIM_Radiance.lib und Objekt ../bin/TKIM_Radiance.exp
···
wird erstellt
sceneio.obj : error LNK2001: Nichtaufgeloestes externes Symbol _ofun
mesh.obj : error LNK2001: Nichtaufgeloestes externes Symbol _ofun
modobject.obj : error LNK2001: Nichtaufgeloestes externes Symbol _ofun
otypes.obj : error LNK2001: Nichtaufgeloestes externes Symbol _ofun
readoct.obj : error LNK2001: Nichtaufgeloestes externes Symbol _ofun
../bin/TKIM_Radiance.impd : fatal error LNK1120: 1 unaufgeloeste externe
Verweise
Fehler beim Ausf�hren von link.exe.
I normally only use C++ and not C, so a hint would be very nice!
Best regards and have a nice year,
Patrik
I am learning to run Radiance to simulate daylight in a simple atrium. When I defined grid, the photometer only appear in one node and in the dialog box was written: Unhandled Exceptin C0000005 (Access Violation Reading Ox ffffffff) at address 671E3570h). I never met this problem in other cases.
My second question: How to turn up AM/PM in the time box of Camera Simulation Set Up.
thanks, Floriberta
hi everybody !!!!
my name is pillo. i m not new on this NG...
now i m in trouble with glare analysis, in fact it happens that DGI < 0...(daylight
scene whit perez sky and simple glass primitive)
i think it means that DGI is very low (quite 0) (uniformity of luminance
in the scene and little glare sources dimensions..) BUT i m not sure..
if anybody does know anything about .....
or he has some trick to analyze glare with radiance....
i need your help,
tanks
pillo
Hi there,
just new on the list, and I'm immediatelly going to ask a question :
I'm currently working on a project concerning visual-lighting problems in office-buildings, more specifically problems concerning blinding and glare, so in short, visual comfort.
Now, for the glazing I'm using Optics5 to calculate the transmittance of the used glazing-system. When I get the grafs and data (spectral), I export this data to Radiance, via the "export to radiance" option in Optics5 itself. I then get the R, G & B values in radiance. Now, my question, Optics5 provides transmittances and reflectances, so after exporting the data to radiance do these values remain transmittances? The R, G & B values, are they transmittances? So for, I haven't found any reason to believe that the "export" function converts them to transmissivities, but I want te be sure that the convertor doesn't comprise the trans.cal convertion too.
I 've got another question that is linked to the previous one. When you get the converted data from Optics5 in Radiance, can I directly use them as glazing-data-input in the material file for the glazing or not? At the moment, I'm still thinking that the R G B 's are transmittances, so if I use them directly without converting them to transmissivities, am I going to get realistic result? After all, Radiance uses transmissivity for the calculation, so I'm risking to get a double-correction on my results.
If anyone can clear this out for me, I'd be very grateful.
Birger
···
_________________________________________________________________
Geschenkidee�n en e-cards voor Valentijn ! http://www.msn.be/valentijn
Dear Radiance Workshop Attendees:
We plan to hold another image contest for this year's workshop. Besides getting your cool image on posters and CD covers and labels, Raphael promises to come up with some suitable first prize, most likely a beer or cappucino of your choice.
Square and round images are preferred for the CD, and portrait images for the poster.
To see the previous year's entries, go to the online CDs:
http://www.radiance-online.org/radiance-workshop1/cd/
http://www.radiance-online.org/radiance-workshop2/cd/
See you in Fribourg!
-Greg (& Raphael)
P.S. We are still taking last-minute reservations if you missed the deadline last week.
Miguel Oliveira
NaturalWorks - Consultants
Lisbon:351213971816/914310067
I tried sending this yesterday, but used the wrong sending address and had it rejected...
During my hiatus from physically-based rendering in 1999-2001, I was employed as a software engineer at Shutterfly, Inc. I worked intimately with their digital photographic printers, which went directly from 24-bit RGB images to photo paper via LED and fluorescent line-exposure units. From this experience, I can assure you that the best printers cannot reproduce a black darker than 1%, which doesn't include the 3% reflection you get off the surface coating. In other words, a glossy print, angled so that the specular reflection mirrors something black, produces a maximum contrast no better than 100:1. In an uncontrolled environment where the glossy reflection is not black, the maximum contrast can degrade terribly, to as little as 2:1 or worse. (That's why people looking at high contrast prints always angle them to minimize reflections.)
Although it is theoretically and physically possible to produce prints with better than 100:1 contrast, the surface reflection described will undermine this contrast to where there is little point in improving it further. This is most likely why no one has bothered. Viewers in a typical ambient environment simply cannot appreciate additional depth in the shadows. As Mark pointed out, there is nowhere to go on the top end, as the best photo paper has a maximum reflectance around 90%. So much for reflection prints.
However, it is possible to get excellent dynamic range out of film transparencies. A well-made transparency, viewed through a slide projector or light table, can have a dynamic range of 1000:1 or better. What's more, you can actually SEE the detail in the shadows and highlights with a transparency, unlike a reflection print where you're constantly fighting with the background. Unfortunately, I haven't found any reasonably priced digital film recorders or services that do a good job of taking higher resolution pixel data and converting it to a wide range of densities, and this is largely a problem with the D/A converters they employ. There is no reason I know why they couldn't do better, and there are probably Hollywood post-production labs that acheive much better image depth, but they are quite expensive and not widely used at this time. In the consumer market, there is nothing.
Around the corner -- in the next year or two -- you can expect to see high dynamic range display devices enter the commercial market. I am working with a Canadian company, Sunnybrook Technologies, that has made great strides in this direction. For more information, you can check out this year's Siggraph paper on the topic:
Seetzen, Helge, W. Heidrich, W. Stuezlinger, G. Ward, L. Whitehead, M. Trentacoste, A. Ghosh, A. Vorozcovs, "High Dynamic Range Display Systems," ACM Trans. Graph. (special issue SIGGRAPH 2004), August 2004. <http://www.anyhere.com/gward/papers/Siggraph04.pdf>
Ultimately, I think HDR displays are the best way to appreciate lighting simulations. Until then, we're kind of stuck with low dynamic-range, tone-mapped prints and displays.
If anyone knows of a digital path to high-contrast transparencies, I'd love to hear about it.
-Greg
P.S. Regarding the OpenEXR format. It is not a cheap rip-off of Radiance's RGBE format by any stretch of the imagination. It is a more accurate format that is valuable for post-production and special effects image processing, and a very well thought-out library. For a comparison of various HDR image formats, check out my web page on the subject.
http://www.anyhere.com/gward/hdrenc/
Erik Reinhard, Paul Debevec, Sumant Pattanaik, and I are currently working on a book for Morgan Kaufmann Publishers tentatively titled, "High Dynamic Range Imaging." We expect it to be out by next summer.
Hello Greg,
Thank you for your reply. Unfortunately I`m short of time, so if possible I would like to see your scripts, thank you.
I`ve also uploaded a couple of (very noisy) images that I`m getting. Probably this is because I`m not using the right scripts, but just as an illustration.
The images are in:
http://home.att.ne.jp/banana/tiago/radiance/c_79.jpg (example of one patch)
http://home.att.ne.jp/banana/tiago/radiance/output.jpg (result combining all patches)
Regards,
Santiago
···
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Gregory J.
Ward
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 11:59 AM
To: Radiance general discussion
Subject: Re: [Radiance-general] rtcontrib
Hi Santiago,
I wish I could offer you some words of encouragement, because I
appreciate the difficulty you face applying rtcontrib to daylight
coefficients. The truth is, you really need some scripts to help out
with the task, and I haven't yet had a chance to write a general set
of scripts or an executive program for DC analysis. I am working on
this project currently, as a matter of fact.
All I have at this point is a few test scripts I assembled for a
daylight simulation study, and I can make these available for you if
you need an early start on this. If you can wait a few weeks, I will
have something much better, I hope.
Just to answer your question, adding together the rtcontrib outputs
directly gives you the result for a uniform sky. To get a particular
sky, you must multiply each image by the average radiance of the
corresponding sky patch. To compute this, a simple rtrace
calculation using the desired sky model and a set of randomly
distributed rays over the hemisphere will do the trick. Such a set
of rays is given in the file "ray/lib/tregsamp.dat", where there are
64 rays per sky patch. The command to compute pcomb arguments from
this file is:
rtrace -h skymodel.oct < tregsamp.dat \
> total -64 -m \
> rcalc -o '-s ${$2} c_${recno-1}.pic'
I realize this is just a clue, but if you wait a few weeks, hopefully
I can provide a complete solution.
-Greg
Hi Santiago,
I am sending you the scripts in a separate message, as I don't really want to share these with the whole mailing list. My intention is to replace them with something more general and robust in the coming weeks, and I don't want to create a lot of confusion beforehand.
The noise you are seeing can be reduced with different parameter settings or high resolution sampling, but it will never go away. Rtcontrib, unlike rtrace and the other Radiance tools, produces an unbiased Monte Carlo sampling, which shows variance (noise) which is an honest estimate of the uncertainty at each pixel. You can try running it through a noise reduction filter if you find it offensive, but we can't use the irradiance interpolation algorithm with rtcontrib.
-Greg
···
From: Santiago Torres <[email protected]>
Date: October 31, 2005 9:33:53 PM PSTHello Greg,
Thank you for your reply. Unfortunately I`m short of time, so if possible I would like to see your scripts, thank you.
I`ve also uploaded a couple of (very noisy) images that I`m getting. Probably this is because I`m not using the right scripts, but just as an illustration.
The images are in:
http://home.att.ne.jp/banana/tiago/radiance/c_79.jpg (example of one patch)
http://home.att.ne.jp/banana/tiago/radiance/output.jpg (result combining all patches)
Regards,Santiago
Hello Greg,
Thank you for the explanation. I will try with different settings, but I feel better now. First I though I was using rtcontrib in a wrong way (now I realize I had tried with very low settings). Sorry for the confusion.
Best regards,
Santiago
···
On Nov 1, 2005, at 3:37 PM, Gregory J. Ward wrote:
Hi Santiago,
I am sending you the scripts in a separate message, as I don't really want to share these with the whole mailing list. My intention is to replace them with something more general and robust in the coming weeks, and I don't want to create a lot of confusion beforehand.
The noise you are seeing can be reduced with different parameter settings or high resolution sampling, but it will never go away. Rtcontrib, unlike rtrace and the other Radiance tools, produces an unbiased Monte Carlo sampling, which shows variance (noise) which is an honest estimate of the uncertainty at each pixel. You can try running it through a noise reduction filter if you find it offensive, but we can't use the irradiance interpolation algorithm with rtcontrib.
-Greg
From: Santiago Torres <[email protected]>
Date: October 31, 2005 9:33:53 PM PSTHello Greg,
Thank you for your reply. Unfortunately I`m short of time, so if possible I would like to see your scripts, thank you.
I`ve also uploaded a couple of (very noisy) images that I`m getting. Probably this is because I`m not using the right scripts, but just as an illustration.
The images are in:
http://home.att.ne.jp/banana/tiago/radiance/c_79.jpg (example of one patch)
http://home.att.ne.jp/banana/tiago/radiance/output.jpg (result combining all patches)
Regards,Santiago
_______________________________________________
Radiance-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
Hello
I would like to know if there is any restriction for the work surface.
Is it supposed to be a quadrilateral polygon? I still have the some
problem to export from the files Ecotect to Radiance. I have the
problem: "Error: some line(s) with code 73 define a non quadrilateral
polygon".
I do not know if it is because the work surface is not well-defined or
because it is not possible to define a non quadrilateral surface.
Does anybody had the error before?
Thanks,
Fabienne
Dear all,
I'm using ESP-r coupling Radiance.Through "daylight coefficient" approach, I
get the illuminance of an indoor photocell location, but the illuminance is
more than 40000 lux. I think it must be much more intense than reality.
Does anybody have any ideas about why that? And how to cut down the illuminance?
thank you.
Warm regards,
ZZ
Hi,
even those who use ESP-R more frequently will have a problem to debug
this without knowing anything about what you model. Are you sure that
your model is closed? Sounds like you forgot the ceiling what you got
there 
CU Lars.
If you're seeing numbers that high, there's probably direct sunlight reaching your test point somehow. If the photocell is facing a window, that's possible. If not, your model may have a light leak.
Randolph
···
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, ZZ wrote:
Dear all,
I'm using ESP-r coupling Radiance.Through "daylight coefficient" approach, I
get the illuminance of an indoor photocell location, but the illuminance is
more than 40000 lux. I think it must be much more intense than reality.Does anybody have any ideas about why that? And how to cut down the illuminance?
thank you.
Warm regards,
ZZ_______________________________________________
Radiance-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
Hi,
thank you for your answer, you are right, few people use ESP-r coupling Radiance now. I’ll check my model if roof is there.
thank you.
ZZ
Hi,
eventhosewhouseESP-Rmorefrequentlywillhaveaproblemtodebug
thiswithoutknowinganythingaboutwhatyoumodel.Areyousurethat
yourmodelisclosed?Soundslikeyouforgottheceilingwhatyougot
there;-)
CULars.
···
Radiance-generalmailinglist
[email protected]
http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
Dear all,
I am having a problem when trying to generate an hemispherical view of
the sky using GENDAYLIT, I always retrieve the error
pfilt: picture too dark or too bright
Which sounds like the whole image is white. I do not have the same error
when using GENSKY, no matter how high the values for -B and -R are.
Any hint?
How can I generate an accurate image of the sky dome using gendaylit?
Thanks for your help
Giovanni
test01_sky.rad (576 Bytes)
test01.rif (486 Bytes)
test01.rad (100 Bytes)