Vincent Leroy

I have this with all scalar variants I tried (I can also double-check with LLVM variants if you'd like). I can't tell you whether this specific example actually ever worked,...

I forgot a very important point: incorrect value locations also move when I stretch the volume (varying the `offset` parameter in the script). I'll update the issue description.

EDIT: Answering you questions properly. * All scalar variants are problematic somehow, with a 0 at the vertical orientation and moving incorrect values depending on the factors mentioned in the...

I'm coming back to this issue: I updated the sample script above with the recent changes (see [this gist](https://gist.github.com/leroyvn/281cf0f309d0d76c4c32bcb48911c61a)). The issue can still be observed with all scalar double precision...

Thanks to you solving #92, I can now run this with the `llvm_rgb` variants and I get the same result:  The outlier point in this "surface, Rayleigh, directional" has...

Varying the surface reflectance: **No surface, isotropic, constant** (radiance without medium: 1.0)  **Surface (ρ=0.5), isotropic, constant** (radiance without medium: 0.5)  **Surface (ρ=1.0), isotropic, constant** (radiance without medium:...

Other things I tried: * I changed the integrator. `volpath` and `volpathmis` produce the same results. * I varied the position of the lower face of the cube (i.e. extending...

Alright, I did what you suggested and it's becoming more and more strange. When I run my script and chain both the single and double precision variants, I get this:...

I added a `del scene; gc.collect(); gc.collect()` to my loop on variants, but this doesn't seem to do much: I still get the same results.

Hi @Speierers, any news regarding that? I had a look at @merlinND's `ptracer` branch and it doesn't look like `SurfaceInteraction3f` is updated over there. I'm actually in the process of...