Daniel Hayes Lighting Analysis C1008035

Lighting Study 1 - Day Light vs Arti�cial Light.This space, a rehearsal room, should be light and bright but in a soft and di�used way as to be practical for reading music/ seeing instruments clearly and etc but as not to be distracting or cast glare. I would say that both spaces achieve this fairly well. One critisism of both is some points of ecessive brightness.: In the day render, the windows glow to brighty and at night the visable light are quite bold. To solve this the light sources could be further...

Naturally, light comes in from the two room height windows at the back, the roof light above the brick wall, and from above the board on the double height ceiling which acts to improve acoustics of the space (it is a rehearsal room) whilst proving di�used light from above.

I think the lighting in day lit space is fairly successful for my speci�c activity. It provides a pretty even light across the room accept from on the two ‘feature walls’ which is intended. I think that the light di�user hung from above works well, casting a constant spreading along the room. Unfortunately, an error in modelling means that there is a red tint to this light here as the surface was not changed to a white or mirroring material.

Arti�cially, the space is lit at similar points to achieve similar e�ects. Two points on the brick wall enhance the texture, two points in the opposite wall light it up as a surface as opposed to directly onto the room, and light is shone from above the ceiling board to maintain an even light in the space.

Although perhaps bordering on a little dark, I think that the arti�cially lit space performs well in considera-tion of its practical purpose. One �aw in the render is the odd line half way up the wall where the re�ected light from above abruptly stops. The light here is speckled, presumably in re�ection of the surface of the board material which though undesired does actually give quite a nice e�ect.

On top of the previously discussed standard of the brick material, there is also an issue here with general blotching on the surfaces which should be addressed.

View A Day

View B Day

View A Night

View B Night

... hidden, in the day scene, the windows could be moved back, creating a vertical shelf to re�ect the light before it enters, and removing the direct visability. and at night the bulbs could be hidden like the successfull ceiling board di�user to cast a more even and less distracting light whilst proving similar e�ects in terms of texture relief.

Lighting Study 2 - Digital vs Physical model.In terms of the materials and their reaction with light, both methods have some strong points. The physical model deals very well with the concept of even light pouring down the brick wall, where as the digital model is very hard, using a strong midday sun where a more overcast sky might be more appropriate to achieve the desired e�ect. I think, although cardboard, that the physical model more accurately conveys the surface of brick I was aiming for whilst the digital is slightly �at and odd looking (a di�erent choice of material is perhaps required). This said, the �oor texture of the 3DS material is fantastic, and far out performs the card of the physical model both in texture and reaction to light. Perhaps scoring the card and adding a layer of PV could go some way to improving the surface...

... but it still wouldn’t be as successful . In general the soft light of the physical model is more accurate then the slightly forceful light of the digital renders - which additionally have odd areas of very high exposure which glow too excessively. One issue I have with the 3DS images is the unrealistic join between wall and �oor, where it seems like some shading or possibly a shadow gap is missing - perhaps this is a fault in the model making and could be amended with an alteration of the connection between the two elements. Conclusively, I would argue that whilst both have good and bad features, ultimately it is the digital render that looks the closest to an actual photograph of a real space.

Above is a slightly slowerrender with a noticeablyreduced qualityto that below.However, for asigni�cantlyreduced time,the di�erenceis certainlyexcusable.

The re�ectionsand textures onthe �oor hereare verysuccessfull butunfortunantlythe brick wall leaves much tobe desired inboth texture andreaction to light.

Physical A

Physical B

Digital A

Digital B

Lighting Study 3 - Lighting Analysis.I think that space performs fairly well as a rehearsal space both during the day and at night. If amendments were to be made they would be to increase the presence of arti�cial light as to make the space more appropriate for the activities taking place. These lights however would have be in line with the concept of reassessed light sources which are re�ected before reaching the room except where used for e�ect (i.e on the brick wall). Exposed lightingwould be to sharp and potentially cause glare so re�ected light is much more appropriate for musicians trying to..

The daylight factor of this space averages at around 4% using the equation:

DF= interior lx/exterior lx * 100

This is an ample day light level, allowing the room to feel fairly comfortable but with perhaps supplementary arti�cial lights if a particular activity requires it. With arti�cial lights on I think the space should perform better then it appears in the analysis. However if this is not the case then alterations to the lighting plan may need to be made. Additionally, the surface on the top side of the ceiling board requires a more re�ective surface as to distribute more light into the room - you can see the limited green on the top corners of the [right] image.

The day lit space shows lux levels of around 300 to 800. These sorts of levels are ample for this space as moderate not high lighting is required. The fact that the light is quite consistently high is also a good thing, with limited dark areas.

The arti�cially lit room appears much darker with lx levels scarcely reaching above 10. I think this is more to do with the readings taken from the arti�cial lights and the positioning of the graph within the model. None-the-less, it should show the increase in lux moving towards the light source perhaps these should be hidden as to achieve an even lighting across the room.

Arti�cial LightingDay Lighting

.. concentrate in an ambient atmosphere or read their music. The numerical data taken from 3D Studio Max con�rms a DF average of 4.35%, and also displays expected levels of direct and indirect illumination (in day lighting analysis). It is perhaps the case that this analysis does not work e�ectively with the arti�cial lighting. Improvements on the arti�cial lighting could be made in the source itself by choosing a more evenly spreading light or one that includes a re�ector attachment.

The top image is very strong in terms of light, showing more then su�cient lux levels.