Is it possible to see an area light in a render?
I tried with EEVEE and cycles.
If not, are there other light types, which would be visible and allow for settings like cone angle etc. ?
Is it possible to see an area light in a render?
I tried with EEVEE and cycles.
If not, are there other light types, which would be visible and allow for settings like cone angle etc. ?
Are you using an emissive plane?
I am using a blender build in area light.
That one seems to be invisible.
Sorry… I’ve wrongly cutted the image.
Go to Object Data of the light, scroll to Ray Visibility and set ON the “camera” option.
Ok, I need to set the renderer to cycles to get the Ray options.
But even then the light itself is not visible, if I set the viewport to render.
But anyway, many thanks for your help.
I can’t understand what you would like to achieve.
Looking at your image, with this perspective, do you want that the area light is lighting the object from top to down and, at the same time, you want to see the bright area?
Something like this?
Are you referring to a cone of light ( like a car headlamp in fog) or something like that?
You can get the settings as you mentioned if you use a spotlight.
A point light as shown in your first pic, it casts light at 360 degrees so there is only power…
My screenshot was showing global gimbal not local one.
Maybe this explains it better:
I made a new scene (temp2):
Now I can see the light source - like in your examples
Then I altered my existing scene (temp1) to the same settings - but I am missing something. The light source is still not visible:
temp1.blend (769.0 KB)
temp2.blend (599.9 KB)
You had modified the Beam Shape of the light.
If you set to 40 as temp1 file, the light become “invisible”.
Well spotted, this behaviour i never noticed before.
#metoo
I had to open the 2 files side-by-side and make comparisons…
But this thing remember me some old memories about something similar with BlendLuxCore…but I’m not sure… I just remember to have meet something similar in the past.
Is this considered intended behaviour or a bug??