Light recovery — where it appears
Named by 11 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
The forty-five degree shadow
Draw the shadow at forty-five degrees and make it as long as the object is tall. In the plan that is exactly a sun halfway up the sky. Applied on the paper it puts four posts under four different suns — altitudes from sixteen to twenty-nine degrees, azimuths thirty-two degrees apart, and shadows between one and three-quarters and three and a half times the height. No drawing angle brings them together.
A light far enough away
The evidence in a photograph that its light is in the room rather than at infinity is one number — how far below the horizon the shadow lines put the light's foot. It falls off as one over the distance, from 211 px at 4 m to 10.8 px at 266 m, while the recovered height stays exact to 5e-13 of itself. What fails first is not the arithmetic; it is the evidence, and one pixel of error costs 0.21 mm of height at the near end and 0.07 m at the far one.
The ball stands at a focus
A ball on a floor casts an ellipse, and the point where the ball touches the floor is a focus of it — not near a focus, on one, to two parts in ten thousand million million. That is Dandelin's theorem arriving somewhere nobody puts it, and it is the only thing about the lamp that the shadow gives away.
The lamp comes out in rays and not in plan
One drawing of three posts and their shadows yields two points, and a curved floor treats them completely differently. The lines through each post's top and its shadow's tip meet at the lamp's image to a ten-thousandth of a pixel at every curvature, because a top and a tip are two points of one real ray. The lines through each foot and the same tips meet 113 pixels from the lamp's foot — and the lamp placed from an exact point and a wrong one lands 1.3 metres away.
How many lamps a drawing has
The shadow field recovers a lamp by intersecting drawn lines. Two lamps make that a partition rather than an intersection — and two centres fit any bundle better than one, on a one-lamp drawing as readily as on a two-lamp one, so a count is a decision that needs a noise level before it exists. A criterion built on a penalty instead of a noise level returns four.
The distance at which two lamps part
Two lamps five centimetres apart are one lamp, and the drawing is right to say so. The separation at which they become two is proportional to how carelessly the picture was clicked — 3.6 centimetres at half a pixel, 7.2 at one, 28 at four — with no floor anywhere, so nothing but care stands between a reader and any separation at all.
A floor cannot fake a second lamp
Cast the same two lamps onto four floors at four curvatures and ask how well one centre explains the drawing. Every one of the thirteen answers is 138.3277 pixels — the same to fifteen digits, because a floor decides where along a ray the shadow's tip landed, and a line through a point and another point that has slid along it is the same line.
The drawing does not run out of lines
Every post supplies a line to every lamp, so a drawing of five posts offers ten lines to two lamps and twenty to four — the unknowns and the constraints grow together and two posts fix any number of lights. What runs out is the partition, whose margin falls from 251 pixels to six as the share of lines assigned correctly falls from all to just over half.
A lamp behind the camera
A light behind the photographer has no image — the projection refuses it — and the shadows it casts are in front of them, drawn as ordinary shadows. The construction that recovers a lamp from those shadows works anyway, meeting to a ten-thousandth of a pixel at the point the reversed divide puts it, and the taught reading of where the answer lies gets the case exactly backwards.
Counting shadows is not counting lamps
Two lamps close together cast one connected dark patch and the drawn lines say two. One lamp behind two cards casts two patches and the lines say one, exactly. And the arrangement where the patch count is right — two lamps far apart — has no fully dark region at all, so the same floor answers one, two or zero depending on which darkness is being counted.
The arrangement the count cannot see
Five posts laid out five different ways give the same leverage to a sixth and the same separation limit to a quarter, and the sixth arrangement — posts strung out along their own shadows, built to be exactly degenerate — is no worse than the rest. The degeneracy belongs to the family the count does not use, and its conditioning there is exactly zero.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Point lightConditioningIdentifiabilityHorizonResidualShadow projectioncentre of projectionerror propagationModel errorshadow vanishing pointVanishing pointBack projection