I want to get rid of the noise but I can't for the sake of god find out what is causing it. I am using an HDRI. I am not using glass materials. I blocked all the HDRI light with objects apart from 2 windows (no glass, no geometry, just 2 big openings). Here is a picture (32 samples) : (I am new to blender but I am very familiar with 3d environments) (HDRI is hidden by ''world-> ray visibility-> camera (uncheck)'' but checking it doesnt make any difference anyways)  EDIT: My question here lies on, why does this happen? The problem is solved, I can just increase the samples and activate the denoiser. The problem I have with this is that previewing with 32 samples is different than previewing with 100 or 500 samples. At one point I added a glass material and it acted as a noise trap and after removing the material, the noise trap persisted. I want to know why that happened.
I know that this question is a bit old or maybe overdone, but I'm running the latest edition of Blender and when I use the Cycles engine I get really fuzzy results and I can't find a simple, non-compromising solution to the quality.  I don't know exactly what I'm doing wrong here, but I'm sure others share my frustration.  Leaving everything in default settings, I started a new project and switched to the Cycles render.  I duplicated the cube and set colors for two Diffuse BSDF shaders, then went ahead and made walls and a floor all sharing the same diffuse shader.  I made two windows to emit blue light.  The screenshot has gaps between the walls because of the setup:  I'm aware that it's considered very incomplete and many have come to terms with some amount of noise, but is this normal?  Furthermore, with default settings or not, I can't change the amount of noise produced.  Supposedly, using "progressively refine" in the rendering tab should make it refine itself indefinitely, however Cycles only counts to 10 refines and then stops, creating a render which is a pixel-perfect match of the ordinary rendering method when it's completed.  I understand that there are tricks that can be used to reduce noise, but at the cost of extra processing time and usually small quality conflicts, like blurring.  My question essentially boils down to is this Cycles' current limit?
How to instantiate polymer component programmatically in dartlang? Showing that $\mathbb{R}$ is connected So I know that $\mathbb{R}$ is both open and closed. But given a set, $X\subset \mathbb{R}$, $X\ne \emptyset $ that is both open and closed, how does one show that $X=\mathbb{R}$?    Here is my attempt: Using the definitions I was given, $X$ open implies that for every $x\in X$ there is a $\delta \gt 0$, $(x-\delta,~ x+\delta)\subset X$.    Also, since $X$ is closed , $B=\mathbb{R}$\  $X$ is open.    However, I don't know how to proceed. NB: This is not a homework problem. How do I read in the contents of a directory in Perl? How to make grass appear on top of ground not in middle? prove that there are infinitely many numbers of the form $x = 111....1$ such that $31\mid x$ Opening Chromium on Ubuntu VPS Ubuntu noob here. I recently got a VPS running Ubuntu, and decided to install Chromium, my preferred browser, on it. After installation completed, I got a message stating that I cannot open Chromium with root privileges. How would I go about opening Chromium? Converting WKT to SHP? I currently have an Ubuntu-Windows Dual boot. However, I would like to try out a new OS so I burned Linux Mint to a USB stick.   I would like to install Linux Mint and remove Ubuntu while still keeping my windows dual boot. I've already backed up my Ubuntu setup so I can wipe it out.   In the Linux Mint installer, should I choosing the "install alongside windows" option do this? In what order should one apply max HP reduction and damage? A character at 10/26 HP is hit by a Wraith and fails the Constitution saving throw. They take 21 damage and their maximum HP is reduced to 5.  Are they unconscious because the 11 excess damage is less than 26 or dead because it's greater than 5? How many solutions are there to $x_1 + x_2 + ... + x_5 = 21$? How many solutions are there to the equation      $x_1 + x_2 + x_3 + x_4 + x_5 = 21$    where $x_1, i = 1,2,3,4,5$ is a nonnegative integer such that $0 ≤ x_1 ≤ 3, 1 ≤ x_2 &lt; 4$, and $x_3 ≥ 15$?  I have correctly completed the previous parts of the question but am having trouble with this particular restriction.  The total number of solutions to the equation is $C(25,21) = 12650$.  I have tried to do each restriction individually:  For $0 ≤ x_1 ≤ 3$, I solved this by subtracting the number of solutions when $x_1 ≥ 4$ from the total number of solutions. This is $C(25,21) - C(21,17) = 5985$.  For $1 ≤ x_2 &lt; 4$, I have $C(24,20) - C(21,17) = 5985$.  For $x_3 ≥ 15$, I have $C(10,6) = 210$.  However, the restriction is when these are all together. I am not sure how to proceed. The answer is $106$. What is the difference between # and . when declaring a set of styles for an element and what are the semantics that come into play when deciding which one to use? How to filter uninteresting questions I have trouble comparing 2 double in Excel VBA  suppose that I have the following code  Dim a as double Dim b as double a = 0.15 b = 0.01   After a few manipulations on b, b is now equal to 0.6  however the imprecision related to the double data type gives me headache because  if a = b then  //this will never trigger end if   Do you know how I can remove the trailing imprecision on the double type? two conditions in one sentence using would Comparing two java.util.Dates to see if they are in the same day Factor 2 in Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle: Which formula is correct? Some websites and textbooks refer to $$\Delta x \Delta p \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ as the correct formula for the uncertainty principle whereas other sources use the formula $$\Delta x \Delta p \geq \hbar.$$ Question: Which one is correct and why?  The latter is used in the textbook "Physics II for Dummies" (German edition) for several examples and the author also derives that formula so I assume that this is not a typing error.  This is the mentioned derivation:     $\sin \theta = \frac{\lambda}{\Delta y}$      assuming $\theta$ is small:      $\tan \theta = \frac{\lambda}{\Delta y}$      de Broglie equation:      $\lambda = \frac{h}{p_x}$      $\Rightarrow \tan \theta \approx \frac{h}{p_x \cdot \Delta y}$      but also:      $\tan \theta = \frac{\Delta p_y}{p_x}$      equalize $\tan \theta$:      $\frac{h}{p_x \cdot \Delta y} \approx \frac{\Delta p_y}{p_x}$      $\Rightarrow \frac{h}{\Delta y} \approx \Delta p_y \Rightarrow \Delta p_y \Delta y \approx h$      $\Rightarrow \Delta p_y \Delta y \geq \frac{h}{2 \pi}$      $\Rightarrow \Delta p \Delta x \geq \frac{h}{2 \pi}$   So: Which one is correct and why? Show rigorously that the sum of integrals of $f$ and of its inverse is $bf(b)-af(a)$ Suppose $f$ is a continuous, strictly increasing function defined on a closed interval $[a,b]$ such that $f^{-1}$ is the inverse function of $f$. Prove that,   $$\int_{a}^bf(x)dx+\int_{f(a)}^{f(b)}f^{-1}(x)dx=bf(b)-af(a)$$   A high school student or a Calculus first year student will simply, possibly, apply change of variable technique, then integration by parts and he/she will arrive at the answer without giving much thought into the process. A smarter student would probably compare the integrals with areas and conclude that the equality is immediate.  However, I am an undergrad student of Analysis and I would want to solve the problem "carefully". That is, I wouldn't want to forget my definitions, and the conditions of each technique. For example, while applying change of variables technique, I cannot apply it blindly; I must be prudent enough to realize that the criterion to apply it includes continuous differentiability of a function. Simply with $f$ continuous, I cannot apply change of variables technique.  Is there any method to solve this problem rigorously? One may apply the techniques of integration (by parts, change of variables, etc.) only after proper justification.  The reason I am not adding any work of mine is simply that I could not proceed even one line since I am not given $f$ is differentiable. However, this seems to hold for non-differentiable functions also.  I would really want some help. Pictorial proofs and/or area arguments are invalid. Projectile/orbital motion over very long distance We know the optimum angle for greatest horizontal displacement when launching an object with projectile motion is 45 degrees.  How to solve the angle when it is real long distance around the earth where we cannot assume that gravity is constant but is given by $F=\frac {-GMm}{r^2}$. I use differetial equation to solve it and obtain 45 degrees.   First, for the vertical distance $y$, change $v=u-gt$ to $y'=u-y''t$. Then solve it to obtain a function $y(t)$. When $y'(t)=0$ we have the time for maximum vertical distance. Then insert the value to horizontal equation.   Can anyone guide me through this problem because I am not confident with my working Is there a practical way to change the phone number in Uber app when arriving at a country? Capture characters from standard input without waiting for enter to be pressed