Talk:Intermediate Lighting

Added a little about the lightmaps. --RabidMonkey 11:06, 30 Jun 2005 (PDT)

Suggestion: Should this page be renamed to Intermediate lighting? I think it should, because:

1. The title "Advanced" makes it sound like these things should be used only attempted by "advanced" mappers. But in my opinion, almost as soon as a mapper can manage to use normal light entities, they should be graduating to light_spots and light_environments, because the results are much better but they aren't really that much more complex.
2. There is plenty that could be written about lighting that is at a genuinely an "advanced" level. For example, lighting for dramatic expression and mood setting purposes, techniques for correctly lighting characters, etc.

--Giles 00:37, 17 May 2006 (PDT)

Smoothing groups

I'll add some screenshots from Metastasis 2 when I reboot into Windows later - I managed to get some lovely lighting on some vaulted ceilings through using multiple, separate smoothing groups that way... —Cargo Cult _{(info, talk)} 04:12, 13 Sep 2006 (PDT)

Excellent TY, I was tihnking about getting some images to demonstrate it. Any tiny possibility there could also be one that shows it without the groups to proove the point? NM I jsut spotted the article shange thats perfect. --Angry Beaver 13:59, 13 Sep 2006 (PDT)

Lightmaps

I'm wondering if a lower lightmap value actually means "better quality", or just sharper lighting. I mean if you have an area with mostly indirect, diffuse lighting, you don't want to put low lightmap values in those areas, because that would look worse, am I right? --Andreasen 14:19, 13 Sep 2006 (PDT)

Higher resolution / better quality representation of the lighting reaching the face. Same difference, a lower lightmap value wont improve the light reaching it but it will improve how its shown.

Psychology

Hope you dont mind I ran an overhaul on that, there more supposed to be mini tutorials and what you were getting into need explaining deeper and better. I do belive its needed but I think the better place for it is the color theory article it now links to. And anyway the POV and organization were a bit shaky there. If i hadn't felt inclined to rewrite it i would of slapped on a cleanup and POV tag. --Angry Beaver 20:15, 13 Sep 2006 (PDT)

Well, actually, it needs less explaining, because I'm not talking about color theory "new-age" aestetics, but color temprature science: 254 216 146 is the color that Valve uses for light bulbs, so (if you were to trust them) any light source with this common temperature should be 254 216 146. The 255 255 255 shouldn't be avoided because it doesn't look pretty, but because real life light sources (with the only exception possibly being the sun at mid day) doesn't use this color. If you want to scrap something, scrap the psychology bit, but the impact of temperature on subjects has been much more proven than "the viewers eyes are being drawn to places by colors" mumbo-jumbo, so I am going to be grumpy if the section ends up in color theory. --Andreasen 20:43, 13 Sep 2006 (PDT)

I rewrote it into no fewer than FOUR topics now: Temperature, emotional stress factor, color theory mentioned, and spacing of lights. Now I'm happy. =) --Andreasen 22:45, 13 Sep 2006 (PDT)