首页 -> 登录 -> 注册 -> 回复主题 -> 发表主题
光行天下 -> LightTools -> LightToolsVsTracePro [点此返回论坛查看本帖完整版本] [打印本页]

shiloh 2005-09-22 20:26

LightToolsVsTracePro

  TracePro Overview yAJrdY"  
cPl$N5/5  
Like LightTools, TracePro is an solid-modeling based illumination modeling program with a Windows-based interface and CAD import/export capability (bogAi3<F  
K+U0YMRmz  
TracePro modeling capabilities are similar to LightTools but with significant weaknesses that make it harder to use and less flexible, and is especially limited in 3D texture modeling compared to LightTools i+Xb3+R  
_lOyT$DN  
TracePro analysis features are similar to LightTools, but LightTools is much stronger as an interactive design AND analysis tool
shiloh 2005-09-22 20:29
TracePro Weaknesses C:}"?tri  
.!1E7\  
User Interface Or()AzwE@  
Must move/rotate objects by dialog box only IkLcL8P^  
Default naming convention (for spheres/elements, etc) is confusing and ambiguous }4*~*NoQ  
p:4oA<V  
Modeling sGJZG  
Most elements cannot be edited .ffb*gZ4  
  Must be deleted and recreated (including optical properties) PkdL] !:  
No unboolean capability W'C~{}c=  
Boolean limited to two objects at a time 4p(\2?B%f  
3D texture very limited vs. LT
shiloh 2005-09-22 20:31
TracePro Weaknesses [Kanj/  
TP)}1 @  
Ray Trace ~w$ ^`e!]  
No interactive (point & shoot) ray trace ^{+_PWn  
No point sources; no volume sources WNV}@  
Clipped Lambertian sources are difficult (LED or fiber output) :W1B"T<  
WS ^%< h#  
Analysis =&?BPhJE  
No illumination error estimate !JwR[X\f  
Only 4 preset bins “available” 3gba~}c)  
No 2D intensity distributions of full spheres i}LVBx"K(  
Limited ray sorting options
shiloh 2005-09-22 20:32
LT Strengths vs. TracePro ,A!0:+  
2xpI|+ a%  
LT has excellent design features vs. TracePro H}}C>p"!,  
Interactive ray trace lyyR yFfQ  
Editable geometry XRWy#Pj  
More powerful macro language in LT (VB/COM/Excel/etc. vs. Scheme) -Y/c]g  
V3> JZH`  
TracePro features not fully or well implemented [-JU(:Rh  
3D textures f5&K=4khn  
Source definition B["C~aF  
Many others
shiloh 2005-09-22 20:34
TracePro/LT Feature Checklist ?hnxc0 ~P  
c`_[q{(^m  
Recent LT features addressing TracePro competition qgw)SuwW  
New LT 4.0 User Interface 3g5 n>8-  
Accelerated Ray Tracing (improved in 5.0) VPXUy=W  
AOI and Wavelength Scattering capabilities i}r|Zo  
Powerful 3D texture modeling for backlights (greatly expanded in v5.1 available 12/04) 8{4jlL;"`?  
aO$I|!tl  
TracePro features not in LT TKZ[H$Z  
Ray trace through GRIN material aqN6.t  
Birefringent ray tracing
shiloh 2005-09-22 20:35
Misc. Comparisons, LT vs. TP K0] 42K  
ppK`7J>Z  
Some large CAD models consume 20-30% more RAM and more CPU time in TP vs. LT 9._owKj  
0}I aWd^4  
TP CAD import repair feature much slower than LT 8(""ui 8  
, FD RU  
Inability to edit properties of Booleaned objects in TP (easy and unlimited in LT) [^2c9K^NK  
tkKiuh?m  
Luminance meter simulation is simple approximation in TP, much more flexible and accurate in LT :[.**,0R  
$irF  
Most operations in LT can be done by mouse, by numeric input, or any combination (fewer TP features are mouse-enabled) R*r;`x  
&-hXk!A  
LT online help is extensive and useful, but very limited in TP fu $<*Sa2  
U/9_:  
ORA Tech Support for LT is by a dedicated team or experience illumination and optical engineers
shiloh 2005-09-22 20:36
3D Texture Comparisons g! DJ W  
@PAT|6  
3D texture modeling more flexible and much faster to ray trace in LT vs. TP _%:$sAj  
'nSo0cyQ  
LT (5.1) has flexible features to parametrically vary all 3D texture features (spacing, size, angles, depth, etc.) by equation or by direct “placement lists” imported from spreadsheet or other software bn6WvC 3?  
EN;s 8sC!  
When optimization is available in 2005, these parametric textures will make it much easier to design backlight systems
shiloh 2005-09-22 20:37
Coming Soon in LightTools 'Uu!K!  
I> BGp4AQ  
EE$\8Gx']!  
Photorealistic rendering will be introduced in LightTools in 2005 `A ^  
    Available now in TP, but feature is poorly implemented /Xk-xg+U  
Tqj:C8K{  
Illumination optimization including special backlight design features will be introduced in 2005 4Be'w`Q {  
    Has been demonstrated in papers, ORA demos, and limited customer testing in 2004 L(+I  
    yr/G1?k%ML  
    Is now being developed for maximum ease of use for typical users and applications       without user programming
结构设计 2005-09-29 08:31
看来楼主对这两个软件深有了解吗！佩服佩服...
robin 2005-10-12 11:41
Shiloh,你好！你的帖子非常好！谢谢！
TracePro 2005-10-26 11:06
呵呵！这是LightTools原厂的文章  jH>`:  
当然是自夸自家软件 x7ZaI{    
V;29ieE!  
TracePro的分析功能以及杂散光分析都远比LightTools强，这是公认的
arkshell 2005-11-05 15:50
下面是引用TracePro于2005-10-26 11:06发表的: Y>6N2&Q  
呵呵！这是LightTools原厂的文章 ]I_*+^?tI  
当然是自夸自家软件  />6ECT  
TracePro的分析功能以及杂散光分析都远比LightTools强，这是公认的
TV=K3F5)M  
"hi03k  
我觉得TP在分析效率上比LT要高，操作更加人性化
arkshell 2005-11-05 15:58
下面是引用blueheaven于2005-10-13 22:55发表的: sn"z'=ch  
非常感谢，不过我希望有中文的，呵呵！ )+R n[MMp  
LT5.1因为没用过所以不敢妄自发表评论，不过我用过LT4.0（从楼主那来的）和TP3.22 ，就实际应用来讲，Lt要比TP运算功能强大，举个例子来说，LT可以算400万的光线——虽然可能需要两天，但是TP算4万的光线就比较勉强了，尤其是在光线在Texture中进出比较多的时候。 C~R ?iZ.&U  
而且LT的分析也比Tp的强一些，LT的角度分布比TP的要好些，是立体的 ；TP的辉度分布比LT的要好些，因为TP自动分配画素大小--这也是我喜欢的地方；TP的布尔运算比较强大，这是我最喜欢也最常用的功能，比sw等的相应的功能好多了。 c_8<N7 C  
我最喜欢的流程是：sw做好零件--〉TP做布尔运算——〉speos 或LT仿真。。。 ^=5x1<a9$  
呵呵。。在运算这块不管怎么说LT4.0和TP3.22是无法和speos比拟的。。 ^qnmKA>"F  
.......
z;!"i~fFK  
400万条，我用1000W条来模拟背光源只需1天半 #*:^\z_Jd  
通常用TP模拟我起码也选择20万条，不过是Simulation mode的，10来分钟就搞定吧。。。。TP因为效率较高，其实上百万条也没关系，选用Simulation Mode，因为你没必要显示所有光线和分析所有面，仅定义一些分析意义的Exit Surface就行了，占用内存较少，效率提供极大！
hhhyz 2006-09-06 08:54
呵呵！这是LightTools原厂的文章 'NZ=DSGIy  
当然是自夸自家软件
asp_studio 2006-09-07 07:56
了解~~~~佩服佩服...
erinlee 2006-12-02 08:46
TP并没有它说的那么慢，我觉得不好的地方就是网点的设计方面没有LT灵活
yckuang 2007-08-24 14:41
帖子给人感觉是LightTools明显优于Tracepro
mary.zh 2007-10-28 17:39
Shiloh,TKS!
pulse 2007-12-04 06:05
偶的 Y wen 欠佳，大意是TP 完败?
yxfangling 2008-05-08 17:59
好强啊
bililly 2008-05-21 21:29
楼主高人啊！
gcnash 2016-10-30 16:51
学习了~~~
查看本帖完整版本: [-- LightToolsVsTracePro --] [-- top --]

Copyright © 2005-2025 光行天下 蜀ICP备06003254号-1 网站统计