Jump to content
The Dark Mod Forums

Feature request: emissive materials/volumetric lights


peter_spy

Recommended Posts

When I move the falloff image to lights/ folder:

 

Green/purple hue from compression is still there, although a bit less noticeable, I think? Maybe lights folder uses highquality instead of forceHighQuality?

I would like to have the .pk4 to check that.

Do you have postprocessing on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There you go: https://we.tl/t-MppoYCbXfR

 

I might have postprocessing turned on here, but the only thing it does in that scene is increased contrast. Without PP it looks the same, just a tad softer. Also, it seems those horizontal streaks are from slight noise applied to falloff image to mask banding. Looks like like this isn't a good idea here.

Edited by Judith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There you go: https://we.tl/t-MppoYCbXfR

 

I might have postprocessing turned on here, but the only thing it does in that scene is increased contrast. Without PP it looks the same, just a tad softer. Also, it seems those horizontal streaks are from slight noise applied to falloff image to mask banding. Looks like like this isn't a good idea here.

Thanks

 

Could you drop the makeintensity and see if makes any difference

 

The relevant original code: https://github.com/TTimo/doom3.gpl/blob/aaa855815ab484d5bd095f347163194ac569abcc/neo/renderer/Image_load.cpp#L1353

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't make any difference, I guess that's because the image already is a greyscale texture. https://modwiki.xnet.fi/MakeIntensity_(Image_program_function)

 

That makeintensity keyword was unnecessary, I didn't check what it does until now.

Edited by Judith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, what is the desired behavior - always upload falloff images using an uncompressed format?

 

Yes. Once we got that, we can try to resize or remake falloff images to get rid of the banding in lights.

Edited by Judith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's easy to do.

However, I'm not sure we should invest in that.

Moving forward with the multi-light shader, we'd need all light textures be the same size.

Even better, not use light textures at all - replace them with math formula.

That should cover 90+% of all lights in missions.

 

In other words, I believe the mappers should plan their design with the assumption that their textures will be compressed.

That means, as little "highQuality" material keyword as possible.

I believe it has been abused to an extent where at some point we might need to start ignoring it.

 

When it comes to lights, mappers should either accept the compression glitches or make an effort of coming up with a formula replacement. No more reliance on sheer GPU horsepower. There are people with weaker GPU's than yours - and less RAM. Give them a chance to play your mission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Even better, not use light textures at all - replace them with math formula.

That should cover 90+% of all lights in missions.

 

That would be awesome. Light banding isn't that bad, as long as the normalmap is quite strong, flat surfaces are the biggest problem. All in all, this seems like a distraction. We need to find a bridge between quality and performance for volumetric lights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That would be awesome. Light banding isn't that bad, as long as the normalmap is quite strong, flat surfaces are the biggest problem. All in all, this seems like a distraction. We need to find a bridge between quality and performance for volumetric lights.

The next thing I want to try is start sampling the view ray from the last solid surface rather that light frustum.

It should fix the visible banding caused by hard cutoff of samples by depth test.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The next thing I want to try is start sampling the view ray from the last solid surface rather that light frustum.

It should fix the visible banding caused by hard cutoff of samples by depth test.

Done

Not sure if it actually helps any (but it should even if a bit :))

To reduce banding caused by discarded samples in shadows: try to squeeze light frustum as close to the occluding silhouette as possible. The close the frustum is to shadow edge, the fewer samples get discarded.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9OoHSmkeSeNZWdyZFliQkNsVTA/view?usp=sharing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dmaped and launched the map from console.

 

Also, I got this message during the game launch:

WARNING:shaderCompileFromFile(glprogs/volumetric.fs) validation
0(66) : error C7616: global variable gl_ProjectionMatrix is removed after version 140
0(67) : error C7616: global variable gl_ModelViewMatrix is removed after version 140
0(141) : warning C7533: global variable gl_FragColor is deprecated after version 120
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I dmaped and launched the map from console.

 

Also, I got this message during the game launch:

WARNING:shaderCompileFromFile(glprogs/volumetric.fs) validation
0(66) : error C7616: global variable gl_ProjectionMatrix is removed after version 140
0(67) : error C7616: global variable gl_ModelViewMatrix is removed after version 140
0(141) : warning C7533: global variable gl_FragColor is deprecated after version 120

I see.

It did work on AMD - this is nVidia issue.

I will try it on Intel now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're back again :)

 

The second light (the projection texture) works as before, but first light (one using geometry) and the third one (transparency shadow map) has light shaft ignoring geometry. They do cut at geometry though, when I noclip out of the room.

obraz.png

obraz.png

Edited by Judith
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If i use the exes from update 14 shadow maps get all burked if i use your exe shadow maps (and the volumetric lights) work very well !?

 

Now i used the exes from the update 14 and the shadow maps worked?! This is very odd.

Could be glprogs out of sync in @nbohr1more's release

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO it only needs performance optimization. With number of samples around 30, the performance is solid, but banding is too prominent. Something around 90 looks pretty good (for projection textures), but it's too performance-heavy. So either having 90 samples at the cost of 30 would be great, or maybe some interpolation between those 30 samples will look better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recent Status Updates

    • Petike the Taffer  »  DeTeEff

      I've updated the articles for your FMs and your author category at the wiki. Your newer nickname (DeTeEff) now comes first, and the one in parentheses is your older nickname (Fieldmedic). Just to avoid confusing people who played your FMs years ago and remember your older nickname. I've added a wiki article for your latest FM, Who Watches the Watcher?, as part of my current updating efforts. Unless I overlooked something, you have five different FMs so far.
      · 0 replies
    • Petike the Taffer

      I've finally managed to log in to The Dark Mod Wiki. I'm back in the saddle and before the holidays start in full, I'll be adding a few new FM articles and doing other updates. Written in Stone is already done.
      · 4 replies
    • nbohr1more

      TDM 15th Anniversary Contest is now active! Please declare your participation: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/22413-the-dark-mod-15th-anniversary-contest-entry-thread/
       
      · 0 replies
    • JackFarmer

      @TheUnbeholden
      You cannot receive PMs. Could you please be so kind and check your mailbox if it is full (or maybe you switched off the function)?
      · 1 reply
    • OrbWeaver

      I like the new frob highlight but it would nice if it was less "flickery" while moving over objects (especially barred metal doors).
      · 4 replies
×
×
  • Create New...