Page |1

ARCHAEOLOGICAL COMPUTING SYSTEMS: AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE

POTENTIAL OF THE MENTAL RAY ENGINE TO ARTIFICIALLY REPRESENT LIGHT IN
THE NEOLITHIC SITE OF ÇATALHÖYÜK .

1. Introduction: Realistic Graphics in Archaeology?

“Currently, many virtual reconstructions are limited because their level of realism cannot
be validated. The generated images may look realistic, but their accuracy is not
guaranteed since they have no physical basis in reality.” (Devlin et al 2001)

There is great potential, but also incredible danger in incorporating three dimensional
technologies into the study of archaeological sites. In particular this is most poignant in
areas where reconstructions factor as both a base for visualisation and as an analysis
for artefacts and structures that are no longer present. Constructing imagery using the
latest programs and techniques can be an incredibly powerful, persuasive tactic.
Therefore responsibility lies with the artist to make sure any modelling is deemed to be
as physically accurate in all areas of investigation as possible, “In order for the
archaeologists to benefit from computer-generated models and use them in a predictive
manner, they must accurately simulate all the physical evidence from the site being
reconstructed” [Devlin et al. 2001].

One of the most important areas of research in this respect is lighting.

Rembrandt said that “All is light”, and within the commercial world of three
dimensional graphics, film, television and photography, it is perhaps the most vital tool
in conveying an emotional and physical response from the viewer. This is no different in
archaeological representation, without light there would be no scene and without
accurate shadows and illumination, the way the viewers respond to what they see can
be fundamentally affected, “if we are to avoid misleading impressions of a site, then the
computer generated images should not only look ‘real’, but must simulate accurately all
the physical evidence for the site being modelled” (Chalmers and Debattista 2005: 2).
This dependence upon light is echoed by Chalmers and Stoddart (1996: 87), who state
 Page |2

that, “In all image synthesis techniques, the fundamental step is computing the amount
and nature of the light from the three-dimensional environment that reaches the eye
from any given direction”.

Lighting was also essentially for past societies, with a clear physical example
visible in the Orkney Islands, where the site of Maeshowe is orientated to face the
south-west, allowing light to spill into the monument only at the heart of winter. It
relegates the rest of the year within to darkness beginning, “at the very point of
midwinter solstice” (Richards 1996: 202) and it has been suggested that it signals the
death of the old year and the ‘rebirth’ of a new year through illumination. Richards
(1996) clarifies that at its construction, Maeshowe would have represented the
landscape, fulfilling a role as a cultural and cosmological marker to its society.
Consequently, light defines more than what people saw, it lies at the very heart of
existence, influencing architecture and belief in a myriad of different ways, “Light in
architecture is a complex phenomenon which penetrates every day practices and
rituals” (Papadopoulos, C. & Sakellarakis, Y. 2010: 417).

In virtual imagery, this can be seen in the work of Gruber and Dobbins (2010),
who used a Maya script to generate virtual daylight in a model of the ‘House of the
drinking contest’ in Antioch. Speaking about their model, they note that the software
was vital in analysing light at the site and that the ability to apply realistic, physical
lighting based on global positioning would have many uses outside of their project
(Gruber & Dobbins 2010: 422). Critically, their success in re-contextualising a series of
mosaics using the technology allowed them to be viewed in a way they cannot be
traditionally. Importantly, they felt their inferences using the software were reliable.

This desire for perspective is mirrored at the site of Çatalhöyük. It is a place

where vision, expression and cosmology formed a valuable aspect of a society. If the
material culture remaining could be replaced into its original context these remains
could provide a great deal of information about life at a site, “of unique international
significance” (www.catalhoyuk.com).
 Page |3

2. Aims: virtual accuracy at Çatalhöyük

This project will attempt to discuss just how reliable the Mental Ray rendering engine is
in producing an image that cannot just be trusted visually, but also reinforced physically
in its ability to generate light. Speaking about Mental Ray in 2007, Joep van der Steen
comments that it is not only an engine with enormous potential, but possibly the best
available at providing beautiful, trustworthy imagery. Consequently, whilst it may not
be as efficient as other commercial rendering engines such as VRay and Brazil, this
ability to provide realistic equations is why it is placed at the heart of this study. The
features it contains extend to providing accurate techniques for Global illumination,
Reflection/refraction, Ray-tracing, Area lights, Bounced Light and Direct Light.

Following preliminary contact regarding reconstruction work at the site of

Çatalhöyük in Turkey, a desire for a stringent test of Mental Ray was needed to convince
site director Ian Hodder into its potential as an analytical tool. The site holds many
conserved wall paintings, sculptures and other artefacts that are to be, “enhanced by
virtual reality techniques and interactive video” (www.catalhoyuk.com) and ultimately
analysed in their original context using three-dimensional software. A reference image
was provided of the onsite Neolithic House (Fig. 1) and from this a photorealistic,
physically accurate render was expected with lighting placed as the focus using a single
daylight system to light the entire scene. Future virtual study could be critical if such a
system can be relied upon to generate light accurately and from any global position.
More importantly, proving the programs ability and precision is crucial in providing any
rendered work from Çatalhöyük with credibility, “if computer reconstructions are to go
beyond mere digital images and models, and become a predictive tool for
archaeologists, physically-based rendering techniques have to be used.” (Gutierrez et al
2008: 2).

This study will evaluate the stages taken to show exactly how much realism can
be attributed to Mental Ray, evaluating the positive and negative aspects of Mental Ray’s
light distribution.
 Page |4

(Fig. 1) – Reference Image from Çatalhöyük, Turkey

3. Setting up a lighting Rig

There are various ways that 3DS Max and Mental Ray can light a scene, from the basic
three point lighting system (http://www.mediacollege.com/lighting/three-point/), to
complex scenes with multiple levels of lights, both standard and photometric
(Physically accurate). However, where considerable study is compiled into structures
such as those at Çatalhöyük, dependent upon seasonal natural light, one of the most
important is the daylight system fashioned by the Mental Ray Sun and Sky package. To
use it within Mental Ray, all that is needed is to access the systems tab and create (Fig.
2). Once set, the Daylight system acts as a directional light source that exhibits crisp
shadows using the mrSun, to produce direct illumination, whilst the mrSky factors in
the many softer, diffuse shadows that provide the environmental bouncing of light. This
is formulated through the Final Gathering process that will be discussed later (Reinhart,
C, Breton, P.F, Landry, Marion 2008: 4).
 Page |5

(Fig. 2) – Setting up a Daylight System

As opposed to the IES equivalent, the Mental Ray Sun and Sky is the most
physically accurate daylight generator and is therefore focused upon in this project. Van
der Steen (2007) justifies this by saying it holds superior options, due to its ability to
provide soft shadows, haze and allow for changing cycles, “I advise you to use this
mental ray Daylight system whenever you need to create an outdoor scene; it is far
better than the alternatives previously available inside 3ds Max.” (Van der Steen 2007)
and importantly, it includes ways of accurately providing light from any location in the
world.

4. Analysing Light in Mental Ray

4.1. Direct Light

There are different aspects to compiling a successful lighting model using the daylight
system in Mental Ray, the first of these is direct lighting. Direct light represents the
exposed area of surface that is illuminated directly by a lighting source, in this case is
the Mental Ray Sun, “Direct light is a pretty common term in the computer graphics
environment. Basically, it is light that is present in the scene in which all the light rays
 Page |6

stop when they hit a surface—there is no bouncing of light occurring.” (Van der Steen
2007: 8). By highlighting the first areas of light, it provides useful visual information
about exactly where rays are falling and hitting surfaces. As shown below (Fig. 3), light
can be seen spilling into the room from its roof entrance, creating distinctive areas of
illumination comparable to those seen in the reference image.

(Fig. 3) - An Example of direct light using only the mrSun

To determine what the viewer should see, Mental Ray shoots light into the scene
until it comes into contact with an object. It is then passed through a shader that
describes how the material should look, before colouring the pixels for the resulting
image. (Van der Steen 2007:7). As shown in image (Fig. 3), when isolated, the Mental
Ray sun is very one dimensional, providing very intensive shadow and rays of light
without any soft shadow. This light simply represents the first stage of accurate
illumination as Mental Ray’s real power lies in indirect lighting.
 Page |7

4.2. Environmental Light: It’s Role.

The sun on its own cannot create accurate light, there needs to be another dimension. In
real life, a huge aspect of lighting is comprised of indirect, environmental light. As light
radiates outwards, it hits various surfaces and fragments, being either absorbed or
reflected into the surrounding environment. How it bounces and how it returns from
the various surfaces it hits is down to numerous factors including translucency, density,
colour and texture. If a ray hits a smooth object it can be reflected in a corresponding
angle to the one that it arrived in, a mirror is a good example of this. This is called a
specular surface. In contrast, light can also hit rough surfaces and be scattered in a
series of different directions. These are called diffuse surfaces (Van der Steen 2007: 7).
Natural light is therefore comprised of both direct light (direct illumination) and
crucially, scattered, environmental light (indirect illumination). In Mental Ray an entire
element of the rendering engine is dedicated to this factor of lighting, highlighting its
importance. In any renders of Çatalhöyük, bounced light will hold a crucial role
importance due to its ability to recolour surfaces, highlight different areas of shadow
and create pockets of illumination. Understanding this aspect of light is essential and
when applied to Çatalhöyük could be used to understand structures and their uses. This
is shown by Papadopoulos and Sakellarakis (2010) in their assessment of natural and
flame lighting on the usage of a potential pottery workshop.

4.3 Shadows

With indirect illumination detailed shadow is created and in Mental Ray these are
achieved primarily using ray tracing. This casts rays to every light in the scene from the
point that is being rendered, and checks if the rays intersect any of the objects on its
way. If so, the point is excluded so that a shadow is generated. Obviously, based on the
materials and how light bounces throughout the environment different coloured and
weighted shadows are created, “Opaque objects create full shadows; transparent
objects create density and coloured shadows, based upon how much light travels
through the object material definition.” (Van der Steen 2007:8). Without environmental
light, the human eye would instantly spot unnatural differences in perception, due to its
 Page |8

constant experience of such phenomena in real life. A good isolated example of this can
be seen below (Fig. 4), where environment light from the scene has been alienated to
highlight how bouncing light moves through the room, creating gradient like shadows
and areas of light fallout. This is drastically different to (Fig. 3) that is very crisp, with
areas of drastic light and dark contrast. The balance between these two natural
phenomena is further emphasized in (Fig. 5), where both elements have been combined.

(Fig. 4) – Isolated Environmental Light using the Çatalhöyük Model

Fig. 5) – Combination of Direct and Environment Light

 Page |9

4.4 Mental Rays Indirect Illumination

There are two main ways Mental Ray can create environmental lighting, Final Gather
and Photon Mapping (Global Illumination). Both of these techniques generate bounced
light in different ways, presenting potentially different results and both can be used
independently of each other (Respective of the light setup) or be linked together.
Although both techniques may show differences, critically, “they are both 100% correct
physically. These differences are usually due to the shaders used inside the scene and
not the underlying algorithms” (Van de Steen 2007: 12).

4.5 Final Gather

Final gather is way of generating the indirect light that occurs in real life lighting by
firing light rays around a scene in a very similar way to how light bounces in reality,
with one fundamental difference, “The rays used for Final Gather do not originate from
light sources or a camera; they originate from the geometry itself.” (Van de Steen 2007:
12). This means that the Final Gather technique shoots rays into the environment and
then back to the light source to collect information and analyse shading. This
information is then compiled to decide how much light reaches the origins of the final
gather rays. It is then cross referenced with neighbouring points and averaged to create
smooth shading.

Within Final Gather there are a series of options that control the spread of
indirect illumination that are crucial to the rendering process. These are Rays, Point
Density, Interpolation and Bounces. To use an analogy, every final gather point
shoots an amount of rays back towards the light source like fingers from a hand and
logically, the more points that are shot, the more information that can be computed.
Point density controls how many points are within the scene and defining more FG
points will provide a greater spread, pushing the total amount of information that can
be collected up, and thus increasing the quality of the image. However, there is a drastic
 P a g e | 10

change on the render times and as visible in (Fig. 6) below, point density and the
amount of rays in a scene only really increase in the very highest settings of Mental Ray.

The interpolation works like a catchment area, looking for a certain amount of
points around the pixel in question and when it finds this amount of rays, it then
averages out the result and as before, the higher this setting, the greater accuracy in the
spread of toning across an image. A benefit to this setting in Final Gather is that it can be
increased without a real drastic difference in rendering times, as can be seen in the
graph below (Fig. 6). Taking in large interpolation settings will make sure that a blotchy
image (Fig. 10) is avoided, as small areas can result in pockets of drastically contrasting
pixels, making the image look uneven and noisy.

Bounced light affects how many diffuse reflections there are in the scene. It is
created when the Mental Ray Engine is told to refract light off of a surface, so that the
light carries on in the scene (Van der Steen 2007: 9) and as mentioned by Reinhart et al
in their study on the daylight system, bounced light is the single most important
attribute for accurate daylight simulation and, “For interior renderings, a Final Gather
Bounce of 4 to 7 is recommended.” (Reinhart, C, Breton, P.F, Landry, Marion 2008: 7).

There are drawbacks to using Final Gather. It can be too smooth, presenting
flickering in animation and it can also lack texture definition, but critically, it provides
accuracy in all levels of its use if used correctly.

FG Point Density Rays per FG Point Interpolate over Number of FG

Points

Draft 0.1 50 30

Low 0.4 150 30

Medium 0.8 250 30

High 1.5 500 30

Very High 4 10.000 100

(Fig. 6) – Table showing the breakdown between the Final Gather settings
 P a g e | 11

(Fig. 7) - Point Density [0.1] Rays [1] Points [1]

Bounces [1]

This image shows a low spread of points with a low

amount of rays. Each point is firing a single ray that
is returning to the light of the scene. The
interpolation then decides how many points will be
used to find an average shade for the pixel. Using
very small settings can create a ‘disco’ like effect.

(Fig. 8) - Point Density [5.0] Rays [1] Points [1]

Bounces [1]

The real difference in this image is the density.

Whilst the rays and bounces are the same, the size of
the clusters is much larger. Density is a great way to
increase detail in shadow, however it is one of the
problematic areas for drastically increasing
rendering times.

(Fig. 9) - Point Density [1.0] Rays [50] Points [50]

Bounces [1]

When Rays and Points are increased, the quality of

shading quickly progresses. This blotchy effect is
often seen in interior rendering as it requires a
greater level of atmospheric light than external
scenes. It simply represents the images above but
spread across a larger area.

(Fig. 10) - Point Density [1.0] Rays [250] Points

[250] Bounces [1]

With 250 Rays and Points, the image is finally

looking smooth and the catchment areas have finally
reached a happy medium where there are enough to
allow for consistent shading across the entire image.
To develop greater contrast in shadows, a high point
density is needed.
 P a g e | 12

The images below show the difference between one bounce and five. On first
viewing, the difference is unnoticeable, however increasing the bounces creates more
softened shadows, that gravitate towards the corners and crevasses of the room. Getting
shadows to form correctly is something that is incredibly important in demonstrating a
life like image to the viewer. It is very difficult to look between these images and find
instant differences, however where the real quality can be shown from the high bounce
image is in the subtle gradient of the shadows, the build up of shadow is a lot cleaner.
The images below represent a higher point density than is seen above (Fig. 10) and have
greater contrast.

(Fig. 11) - Point Density [4.0] Rays

[250] Points [250] Bounces [1]

The effect of the four bounces is very

difficult to distinguish between these
two images and is usually best seen
on shadows cast from objects,
however

When observing the different in the

tonality of shadow it is clear that the
image below provides a more natural
falloff.

(Fig. 12) - Point Density [4.0] Rays

[250] Points [250] Bounces [4]

Between 4-7 bounces produces a

model that realistically highlights
the amount of reflection that
happens in real life. When
comparing in particular the darker
areas of shadow, the smoothness
and realism in the quality of higher
bounces can be seen
 P a g e | 13

4.6 Photon Mapping

“Global illumination is a universal term for the description of a scene in which all aspects of light have been
considered as bounced, reflected, and refracted light. Rendering algorithms that calculate the way light
travels between surfaces of objects are called Global Illumination algorithms. The two most important Global
Illumination algorithms are raytracing and radiosity. Radiosity is used by the scanlinerenderer, whereas
mental ray uses ray-tracing.” (Van der Steen 2007: 7)

Photon mapping is the second Indirect Illumination technique that is used by the Mental
Ray renderer. Unlike Final Gather, it works in a very similar way to how light is bounced
in real life. Using the mrSun (Or any Photon emitter), it fires small particles, called
photons towards the room, where these are either absorbed or reflected. Photons track
energy and colour wavelength, so this technique of indirect illumination is able to bleed
colour onto other surfaces, “Photons in mental ray simulate the phenomena of real-
world photons. Photons are reflected by mirrors, refracted through glass, or scattered
by diffuse surfaces. The big advantage of photons is that they replicate what happens in
nature.” (Van der Steen 2007: 12). The Global Illumination that is achieved through
using photons is split into various sub-features in a similar way to Final Gather. The
most important of these include the amount of photons per sample (The look-up), the
sampling radius and crucially the amount of photons that are fired into the scene.

A larger amount of photons being emitted into the room will provide a greater
potential for information as there are more points to registering data from. These
photons are then collected within a radius that averages the amount of points set in the
max photons per sample setting. A 30 sample will there look for that amount within the
specified area size from itself and if there are more, it will retrieve the closest. Like with
Final Gather, if the radius is too small, or there are not enough photons to register a
consistent image, the results will appear blotchy (Fig. 13). It is therefore important that
all three of these key aspects are balanced so that the maximum amount of photons
entering the scene to fill it is combined with a decent sized sample to create a smooth
image in a radius that is not going to isolate areas of the image.
 P a g e | 14

(Fig. 13) - Photos per Sample [100] – Radius

[0.5m] – Average Photons Per Light [20000]

The blotchiness in the image to the left

highlights how a small sampling size can isolate
photons leaving uneven areas of averaged
shading

(Fig. 14) - Photos per Sample[100] – Radius

[5.0m] – Average Photons Per Light [20000]

Instantly, by increasing the radius in which

samples are taken, smoothing can occur.
However, it is still only sampling 100 maximum
photons, meaning that the colour and energy
will still be very similar. To create a more
balanced image a larger sample size is needed.

(Fig. 15) - Photos per Sample [200] – Radius

[2.0m] – Average Photons Per Light [20000]

Increasing the maximum sample size and

balancing it with the radius allows for more
data to be processed maintain a blended image.

(Fig. 16) - Photos per Sample [300] – Radius

[2.0m] – Average Photons Per Light [20000]

We can finally see that 300 photons per sample

were needed to smooth the walls and the floor.
With this amount of data, Mental Ray can
generate a decent, smooth image.
 P a g e | 15

As with final gather, there is no direct science to which settings are needed, each
scene will require the lighting settings to be tweaked. However there are guidelines to
how to approach photons. As credited to Mental Images themselves, to achieve a
successful image by increasing photons, the user must, “Shoot 4 times as many photons
in the scene from the light source, and then decrease the radius by a factor of 2.” By
doing this, you will keep roughly the same amount of photons in the sample, but the
potential for a smoother image is increased due to more surface detail. Consequently,
van der Steen takes this further, stating that actually, “We should have done the
following: divide the radius by 2, multiply the number of photons by 8, and multiply the
number on the lookup by 2; this is courtesy, again, of the people from mental images.”
(van der Steen 2007: 46).

When combining Photons with Final Gather, the first bounce is overlooked,
meaning that there is only need for one in the Final Gather settings. Photons will then
take over, and provide a rendered image that has, “both great light depth in the shadows
and soft tonal variations in the lighted areas” (van der Steen 2007: 12).

4.7 Ambient Occlusion

On top of the lighting mentioned above there are a number of other techniques that can
be used to further induce accurate light and provide depth to an image. One of the key
techniques for this is Ambient Occlusion. However, unlike Final Gather and Photon
lighting that is concerned with bounced light and multi-bounce transparency, Ambient
Occlusion is concerned at detailing the absence of light in order to develop a successful
shading method.

In the images below, the Ambient Occlusion shader has been used and whilst this
is not the only way to achieve such an outcome, it provides a nice balance to being able
to provide an added dimension to lighting that can be independently edited, “The output
can be used to modulate other render passes to achieve proper compositing in
postproduction (Figure 1.20).” (Van der Steen 2007: 14). The theory behind ambient
occlusion is that there is an ever present light source in the scene (Irrespective of our
 P a g e | 16

lighting system). The amount of shading is distinguished by how much of the geometry
is hidden, or blocked, “What happens internally is that the area above the point to be
shaded is sampled for blocking geometry. If any is found, the percentage of blockage
translates directly to an occlusion factor.” (Van der Steen 2007: 14). It therefore
calculates based on their visibility how much shading the pixels should get. To properly
achieve it using an ‘occlusion pass’ (Fig. 18), exposure and final gather need to be turned
off and the entirety of the objects in the scene are overwritten by a specific, mental ray
shader. On top of simply being used for shading, Occlusion can also be used on a
specular level, to develop a higher level of detail regarding reflections visibility.

Whilst in the images below it is difficult to instantly see what impact ambient
occlusion has to the image, in the corners and where objects sit in front of each other, or
occlude view, the difference is remarkable. In terms of credibility, Ambient Occlusion is
a tool that can be used to simulate an extra dimension to provide an image with depth,
however its use, particularly in post production is an aspect that needs to be stringently
modelled based on an understanding of natural lighting, a knowledge rapidly developed
through consistent work in virtual lighting. This technique in particular is an area that
can easily be carried away with, potentially justifying Barceló (2000: 28) in his
discussions about archaeological accuracy falling behind the desire to demonstrate new
techniques. Ultimately it should be a very subtle effect, requiring definite responsibility,
but when used correctly, it can provide a great deal to an image.

(Fig. 17) - Ambient Occlusion Parameters.

The Ambient/Reflective Occlusion is placed in the

surface shader option of a Mental Ray material and
then into the Material Overwrite section of the
processing tab. On top of normal AO, the type can be
changed to create different results etc Specular
diffusion passes. The samples affect the smoothness of
the image, the trade off in higher samples is render
time. Spread tightens, or lossens the diffusion of the
occlusion similar to a Guassian Blur filter in photoshop.
 P a g e | 17

(Fig. 18) – Ambient Occlusion

Pass

Once a happy medium is found

between the occlusion settings
it is time to render the pass.
How it can turn out will vary
greatly and achieving a realistic
result will depend upon trial
and error and constant
reflection upon the settings
(Fig. 17).

Once completed the occlusion

pass can be taken through to
photoshop where it is layered
ontop of the beauty pass.

(Fig. 19) – Image without

Ambient Occlusion pass

Ambient Occlusion is not a

necessary technique. The
image here shows that even
without it in the scene, there is
depth provided by the Final
Gather. However, there are
areas in the image that look too
clean and it is perfection that
can draw the eye of the viewer.

(Fig. 20) - Image with ambient

occlusion pass factored in

When looking at the difference

that ambient occlusion makes,
the first clear benefit is depth.
The shadows in the image have
not changed, they are simply
highlighted in a more natural
state. The corners no longer
seem completely clean and
objects are now actively
interacting with each other in
the scene.
 P a g e | 18

4.8 Participating Media

An aspect of internal lighting in particular that is often forgotten is how participating

media can affect the quality and natural equilibrium of an image. Especially within
archaeology, the need to represent different mediums that would have refracted light
through varying environments is important. With rooms like those found at Çatalhöyük,
there are clear examples of hearths and fires that would have been used to heat and
cook in a fashion we have ultimately become out of touch with in contemporary society,
“In archaeological sites in particular, the materials used to provide interior light, for
example, candles and wood fires, would have generated smoke, perhaps significantly
affecting visibility in these environments” [Rushmeier 1995]. It is therefore important
to recreate these phenomena to provide accuracy in not just how the geometry looks
through light but also external, cultural and geographical factors like dust and smoke.

Within 3DS Max and Mental Ray there is a very realistic shader that can be
utilized to create these effects in a physically accurate form, “Fog, clouds, and saltwater
scatter the light that passes through them; in other words, they contribute to the light
transport. To simulate this effect, you need a Parti Volume shader. (Parti is an
abbreviation for participating.)” (Van Der Steen 2007: 81). This spreading is caused by
tiny Particles and in Mental Ray this shader can produce a number of different effects
and must be applied to the camera shaders in the rendering tab of the rendering
settings. The main components for the shader are mode, scatter colour and minimum
and maximum step. Mode effectively changes whether the particles affect the entire
scene or simply elements of it. As its base setting, 0 will fill the entire scene and 1 will
relegate the phenomena to only certain areas before asking for a height modifier to
determine where in the scene it occurs. Scatter colour is incredibly important, as it
determines how bright the image is. As a default it is set to around 50% white, which
renders an incredibly over exposed image (Fig. 24). To allow for anything near realism,
this setting needs to be reduced to around 0.08% white. Minimum and Maximum step
effect the sample size and it is useful to start big (around 4.0/4.0) and then slowly
decrease until you get a smooth image
(http://3dsmaxrendering.blogspot.com/2009/03/parti-volume-shader.html).
 P a g e | 19

The Parti Volume shader, like the Ambient Occlusion variant can be applied in
post production (Fig. 22) and I found that this was a very good way of using it. As can be
seen in the images below, when used with the original image, there was a fair amount of
issue with creating a clean output (Fig. 21). In comparison, by simply overwriting the
entire scene with a simple non reflecting black diffuse material, a very clean render pass
could be completed, highlighting not just the participating media itself, but also isolating
the phenomena and allowing a greater insight into its effect on the room.

(Fig. 21) - Natural Part Volume Pass (Fig. 22) - Separate Parti Volume Pass

(Fig. 23) – Parti-Volume Settings (Fig. 24) - High scatter colour

 P a g e | 20

5. The Final Images

(Fig. 25) – (Original)

The photograph provided clearly

shows the areas of the image that
needed to be represented clearly.
Contrasted, dark shadows clung to
the walls and around the baskets at
the right wall, forming a very
distinctive pattern. Light entering the
room also left distinctive spread.

(Fig. 26) – GI/FG (Image 1)

This is the image that combines both

final gather and global illumination.
It provides an accurate texture and
depth to the shadows. If there is one
criticism, it lies in the colour
bleeding into the room. It feels too
warm in relation to the photograph.

(Fig. 27) – Final Gather (Image 2)

This image is much cooler in its

complexion and therefore closer to
the original in its colour. However,
only using Final Gather has made
the interior surfaces seem too
smooth. In comparison to the image
above, there is some depth missing
to the image, especially in regards to
lighting around the lip of the roof
entrance.
 P a g e | 21

(Fig. 28) - Analysis of light spill in the top-right corner. Left – Original Middle –Image 1 Right – Image 2

(Fig. 29) – Selection of the right hand wall. Left – Original Middle - Image 1
Right - Image 2

It is clear from looking at the observations that Mental Ray has produced an
incredibly realistic series of images. (Fig. 29) shows how seamlessly the
three images are and in particular when comparing the Photon based image
with the original, as well as correct shadows, there is also a very similar
texture to the render. The Ambient Occlusion has also brought out the
shading around the baskets and in the corners of the room successfully,
especially in image 1, where the light penetrates the area between the
baskets in exactly the same manner as the photograph, leaving accurate
arcs of shadow where they block the wall. If there is one criticism of the
Photon based render (Image 1) it is that the colour bleed is slightly off.
However that is a texture issue, not a light malfunction. The spilling of light
is identical in the renders, with the volumetric lighting provided the added (Fig. 30) – Top – Original
extra realism needed in representing the gentle haze (Fig. 30). The only real Middle- Image 1 Bottom-
difference between Image 1 & 2 is colour bleed and texture. If further work Image 2
could be completed to combine the mood of the Final Gather with the
texture of the Photons, the results could be stunningly accurate.
 P a g e | 22

(Fig. 31) – Above - Colour Corrected Photon/Final Gather Render Below - Original Image

To produce something that can be regarded as physically accurate as possible in all regards, the levels on
the image were colour corrected to provide a more correct result. Whilst this was completed in post
production, any future work using the Mental Ray engine to render will provide firsthand experience of
textures as opposed to a second hand archive. This will enable greater accuracy in their creation and
colour. If there was a drawback to this project it was that the model was created without the author
having any measurements, or experience of the site.
 P a g e | 23

6. Conclusion

A great deal was learnt by examining Mental Ray. In looking at the final output images, it
is clear that there is great potential in the rendering engine to deliver clean, reliable
imagery. When comparing the two final renders to the original, physically, the way the
light is falling is incredibly realistic. Furthermore, although each render has slight
differences, they both fulfil the claim by van der Steen (2007) that they are 100%
physically accurate (Figs. 26 & 27). This is remarkable considering the entire scenes
dependence upon a single light source. This trust can only be further extended with the
knowledge that the models geometry has been compiled from photographs and not
measurements.

This justification into the power of Mental Ray is incredibly important for work at
Çatalhöyük where a synthesis of virtual reality could present art and culture in its
original habitat, providing a new dimension to both research and viewer experience.
However, this is not just important from an aesthetical and luminary view, accuracy
becomes even more important when taking into account how light affects both
perception of space and crucially such cultural inferences as art, religion and the
domestic household at Çatalhöyük. It is hopeful that future work at the site will have as
successful an impact as the work in Antioch where contentment in their software
evolved to new understanding, “it may invoke a new and more accurate level of
comprehension of ancient environments” (Gruber & Dobbins 2010: 424)

To conclude, the author feels that Mental Ray has proved an immense amount in
this study. From its use of Final Gather to its Ambient Occlusion, the final images created
by the engine have shown a level of realism down to the smallest detail. Shadow and
light has been accurately represented and Mental Ray has been a resounding success in
laying the groundwork for exciting future work reconceptualising physical culture at
the site. In contemporary society it is easy to forget how involved light was in Neolithic
life, “However, it was not the case in ancient times” (Papadopoulos, C. & Sakellarakis, Y.
2010: 417) and it has not been the case on the part of the author.

Mental Ray offers a sublime ability to both balance photorealism with accuracy
and at Çatalhöyük with detailed observation and solid software, virtual reconstruction
 P a g e | 24

can provide new understanding about how art and culture influenced life in one of the
oldest cities in the world (www.catalhoyuk.com).
 P a g e | 25

References

Alan Chalmers, Kurt Debattista, Investigating the Structural Validity of Virtual

Reconstructions of Prehistoric Maltese Temples. VAST 2005: 6th International
Symposium on Virtual Reality, Archaeology and Cultural Heritage . November
2005.

Barceló, J. A., 2000 “Visualizing What Might Be: An Introduction To Virtual Reality
Techniques In Archaeology” in, Virtual Reality in Archaeology, edited by Juan A.
Barceló, Maurizo Forte and Donald H. Sanders, BAR International Series, No. 843

Bender, B. 1998 Stonehenge: Making Space Oxford: Berg

Chalmers, Alan , Stoddart, Simon. 1996 “Photo-Realistic Graphics for visualising

archaeological site reconstructions” in, Imagining the Past: Electronic Imaging and
Computer Graphics in Museums and Archaeology, Occasional Paper No.114, 1996. Pg.
85-94

Devlin, K. and Chalmers A. 2001. Realistic visualisation of the Pompeii frescoes. In

Proceedings of the International Conference

on Computer Graphics, Virtual Reality, Visualization, and Interactions in Africa

(AFRIGRAPH). ACM, 43–47.

Diego Gutierrez, Veronica Sundstedt, Fermin Gomez, Alan Chalmers, Modeling Light
Scattering for Cultural Heritage. ACM Journal on Computing and Cultural
Heritage, 1(2). ISSN 1556-4673, pp. 1–15. October 2008

Gruber, E. , Dobbings, J. 2010 “Illuminating Historical Architecture: The House of the

Drinking Contest at Antioch” in, Fusion of Cultures, Abstrats of the XXXVIII Conference
on Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology Fco. Javier
Melero, Pedro Cano & Jorge Revelles, Pgs 421-424
 P a g e | 26

Kantner, J 2000 “Realism vs. Reality: Creating Virtual Reconstructions of Prehistoric

Architecture”, in, Virtual Reality in Archaeology, edited by Juan A. Barceló, Maurizo
Forte and Donald H. Sanders, BAR International Series, No. 843

Papadopouslos, C. Sakellarakis, Y. 2010 “Virtual Windows to the Past: Reconstructing

the ‘Ceramics Workshop’ at Zominthos, Crete” in, Fusion of Cultures, Abstrats of the
XXXVIII Conference on Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in
Archaeology Fco. Javier Melero, Pedro Cano & Jorge Revelles, Pgs 417-420

Reinhart, C, Breton, P.F, Landry, Marion 2008 Daylight Simulation in 3DS Max 2009

Richards, C. 1996 “Monuments as Landscape: Creating the Centre of the World in Late
Neolithic Orkney” in, World Archaeology vol. 28(2) pp. 190-208

Rushmeier, H. E. 1995. Rendering participating media: Problems and solutions from

application areas. In Proceedings of the

5th Eurographics Workshop on Rendering. Springer-Verlag.

Ryan, Nick, 1996 “Computer based Visualisation of the past: Technical Realism and
Historical Credability”, in, Imagining the Past: Electronic Imaging and Computer
Graphics in Museums and Archaeology, Occasional Paper No.114, 1996. Pg. 95-108

Van der Steen 2007 Rendering with Mental Ray

www.catalhoyuk.com – (Accessed 22/05/2010)

www.christopher-
thomas.net/pages/free_tutorials/tut_ambient_occlusion_shader/ct_tut_mentalray_ambi
entocclusion_shader.htm - (Accessed 20/05/2010)
 P a g e | 27

http://www.lamrug.org/resources/doc/occlusion_tutorial.pdf - (Accessed
20/05/2010)

http://3dsmaxrendering.blogspot.com/2009/03/parti-volume-shader.html - (Accessed
24/05/2010)