As I see it, the RDK should be able to somewhat reflect all possible render engines.
In Maxwell Render lights are just another piece of geometry with an emission texture added. So for a Maxwell light, a texture makes perfect sense. Also there are options in Maxwell to hide light geometry from camera, reflections (cast shadows) and GI (receive shadows), which would compare to those options, you want to have removed.
I don’t understand what you mean by “reflect rectangular lights”. Could you elaborate on that?
I see. That’s the behavior Maxwell shows when the light is “hidden from reflections”. Otherwise lights should show up in diffuse as well as specular reflections. Since Neon doesn’t seem to have an option to suppress specular reflections of lights (can’t test the global options as I currently don’t have Neon installed) I’d call that a bug.
That’s not what a Rhino rectangular “light” is. You can use actual surfaces with emission properties for lighting in Neon/Brazil, but that has nothing to do with “light” settings. Brazil materails do have an ‘area speculars’ option to have not-sure-how-accurately different specular highlights(which are ‘fake’ relfections of invisible ‘fake’ light sources’) for area lights.
Jim is right - rectangular lights are not emissive planes. They are primitive lights sources. If you want an emissive plane, just use a plane with emission. Note, however, that the RhinoRenderer does not support inter-object GI so you won’t see it in the lighting.
I hear you, but I disagree a bit.
The “visible to camera” is an important feature in most renderers, just like “include and exclude” and “cast shadows” and I believe in the push of a button solution. Specular highlights are also something that should be possible to turn off, in my opinion.
It is possible to turn off. Turn the glossiness down to zero.
However - that’s the problem here - these things would be dealt with as true reflections. I understand that you disagree, but we’re talking about the RhinoRender here, not Flamingo, VRay or Brazil. The RhinoRender is designed to be as simple as possible and I don’t want to add any new controls to the UI if at all possible.
Not really, that is a material setting and not a light setting. It can give the same result, but it will also affect other lights etc…
I agree that the UI shall be simple, but not too simple, remember that Rhino is a complex program to begin with, and the Rhino Render needs to be complex enough for serious work, but also not so complex that it competes with Brazil… It is a difficult line though, and I respect your choice, no matter what it is and will be!
I think there’s a difference between powerful and complex. Google is incredibly powerful, but to me, it is simple. I think we’d do well to strive for the same in new things we create for Rhino - and I admire Andy for doing that.
I am sorry if I came across as difficult, I absolutely agree, and that’s what I tried to argue for: simple visible lights. With the option to turn it off for the “pro” users. But I’ll leave you to it, I fully support you in your final decision.
I almost added a suffix to my post: it’s important that the features actually work well, not just be simple. In an ideal world, you could get excellent renderings by assigning materials, adding an HDRI, and clicking the Render button - no more fiddling with little settings.