10
\$\begingroup\$

So I'm adding spherical area lights to my application, and comparing my results with mitsuba, I am getting some differences (left is my approach, right is mitsuba - a pathtraced reference):

Comparison

What I am mainly noticing is that:

  1. The specular is way too bright for roughness values over 0.5

  2. The specular shape gets "flat" (Left-mine, Right-mitsuba, noise caused by low sample count):

Flat Specular


I am using the closest point approximation and the normalization term proposed in Real Shading in UE4, that is: (radius / (distance * 2.0) + alpha)²

I believe issue 1) could be an issue with my normalization term, however I think issue 2) might probably be an issue with the closest point approximation?


Is this kind of inaccuracy expected with the approximations I use, and if so, are there better approximations?

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ For context could you show us the rest of your Implementation please. \$\endgroup\$ – Thomas Mathieson Oct 29 '17 at 10:42
  • \$\begingroup\$ you haven't provided us enough code for us to actually help you. \$\endgroup\$ – opa Mar 23 '18 at 17:19

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.