Comparison
WATT-IF vs set.a.light 3D: actual location or virtual studio?
Both help filmmakers test lighting decisions before shoot day. The deciding question is whether planning starts with your captured room or with a desktop studio you build.
set.a.light 3D public positioning: “Turn Camera, Light & Scene into Production-Ready Set Blueprints.”
| Question | WATT-IF | set.a.light 3D |
|---|---|---|
| Starting point | Supported LiDAR capture of the actual location. | A scene assembled in a virtual studio. |
| Best fit | Location-specific lighting planning on a mobile-first workflow. | Desktop simulation and virtual-studio lighting study. |
| Commercial model | Free active beta, with planned Pro and Creator subscriptions after beta. | License-based product offering. |
WATT-IF does not remove the original room light, replace a meter, or guarantee exact physical results. It is built to make location-specific planning easier to communicate before shoot day.
FAQ
Is WATT-IF a replacement for set.a.light 3D?
No. Both help with lighting planning, but they begin from different places. WATT-IF begins with a supported capture of the actual room. set.a.light 3D is a virtual-studio workflow.
When should a crew choose WATT-IF?
When planning needs to begin with the actual location and a supported mobile LiDAR capture.
When should a crew choose set.a.light 3D?
When a desktop virtual-studio workflow and its license model fit the way the production plans scenes.