Radiance change with light distance

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the rendering equation and Monte Carlo integration in relation to light distance and radiance. It is noted that while radiance does not change with distance, this does not imply that a point light source can illuminate objects from an infinite distance. The conversation highlights the limitations of modeling light as rays, particularly in terms of computational cost and the accuracy of reflections between surfaces. The first limitation involves the energy associated with rays diminishing as more rays are traced, while the second concerns the challenges of accurately modeling curvature. Overall, the complexities of light modeling in rendering scenarios are emphasized, particularly regarding practical applications.
Gadersd
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
I am trying to solve the rendering equation with monte carlo integration. I gather all of the incoming radiance from light sources and plug it into the rendering equation. A reference I am using said that radiance does not change with distance. Does this mean that a point light source will illuminate objects from a infinite distance away since the radiance does not change?
 
Science news on Phys.org
Not sure. Can you provide a link to your reference?
 
I can't be sure, but it appears to say that whatever quantity of light you have associated with a ray will stay with that ray. I wouldn't say that a point source can illuminate an object an infinite distance away, since light is not physically composed of rays.
 
In this modelling scenario you are modelling the path of individual rays which may as well be regarded as individual photons for the purpose of intuition, although the amount of energy associated with each ray is likely to be much greater than an actual photon.

Yes the ray will travel infinitely if running the simulation does not introduce an interaction with another object. But what probability is associated with this outcome in your scenario?

The model appears limited by the quantity of light that can be associated with a ray, and also by the physical accuracy of modelling reflections between ideal flat surfaces separated by large distances.

The first limitation is due to the increase in computational cost of tracing more rays, each having less energy associated with it (as ray energy approaches photon energy resolution is improved). The second limitation is due to measuring and encoding accurate curvature.

The first limitation is obvious and tangible. The second is barely of concern for basically all pracital applications.
 
Last edited:
Thread 'A quartet of epi-illumination methods'
Well, it took almost 20 years (!!!), but I finally obtained a set of epi-phase microscope objectives (Zeiss). The principles of epi-phase contrast is nearly identical to transillumination phase contrast, but the phase ring is a 1/8 wave retarder rather than a 1/4 wave retarder (because with epi-illumination, the light passes through the ring twice). This method was popular only for a very short period of time before epi-DIC (differential interference contrast) became widely available. So...
I am currently undertaking a research internship where I am modelling the heating of silicon wafers with a 515 nm femtosecond laser. In order to increase the absorption of the laser into the oxide layer on top of the wafer it was suggested we use gold nanoparticles. I was tasked with modelling the optical properties of a 5nm gold nanoparticle, in particular the absorption cross section, using COMSOL Multiphysics. My model seems to be getting correct values for the absorption coefficient and...
Back
Top