Hector, thanks for the quick reply! I'm trying to set up a place to post some images. In the meantime, have some questions about your suggestions.
1. I'm using Logarithmic exposure because this is a radiosity solution using out-of-the-box photometric lights, and everything I've read suggests logarithimic exposure. Plus, I've tried rendering the solution with Automatic exposure and the room is completely underlit (It looks perfect using logarithmic, with the exception of bitmaps).
2.Why would you use a different exposure for animations than for stills? They're all the same frames. (I've heard this suggested before, so it must be something I'm not aware of)
3. I've completely played with the output levels of the mapped graphic and this simply will not solve the problem. What I've been trying to explain to the discussion groups is that the image itself is being altered, it's not a lighting level. Try this: Find a personal picture that you're intimately familiar with so you'll know if the image looks different. Map it to a simple square in your model. Point a single light on your square (doesn't matter if it's photometric). Render it using normal exposure and it looks fine. Render it using logarithmic and the image looks wrong.
I have an idea why this is happening, I just don't know how to fix it other than to simply not use bitmaps. It's performing a logarithmic function on the RGB curve data. In other words, if you've ever worked in Photoshop, it's turning the RGB curve data in the bitmap from a straight line into a curved line, completely skewing the value imformation of the image.
I can't be the only person who was ever used a bitmap and logarthimic exposure together, so I'm assuming I'm missing something.
Pictures to follow! Thanks!
