Feature request: emissive materials/volumetric lights

[duzenko 660]

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.

Is that with quickBlur on the projected texture?

[peter_spy 1603]

Yup, the fast blur does nothing to improve banding along the light frustum, it only kind of dims the light. Only the number of samples increases quality of a light shaft.

Edited October 25, 2018 by Judith

[duzenko 660]

Yup, the fast blur does nothing to improve banding along the light frustum, it only kind of dims the light. Only the number of samples increases quality of a light shaft.

Please try with shadows on and off (not the r_shadows but the light material flag)

[peter_spy 1603]

Non-shadow lights obviously improve performance, but I don't see fastBlur doing anything differently.

[duzenko 660]

Non-shadow lights obviously improve performance, but I don't see fastBlur doing anything differently.

Is the banding better without shadows?

[peter_spy 1603]

No, I don't see any difference. IMO, the interpolation has to be done between samples. Blurring falloff or projection images doesn't do anything.

[nbohr1more 2174]

Questions:

 

What kind of fallback happens if the mode or hardware doesn't support this shader?

 

Does this render the same way (using shadow maps) even when r_shadows = 1 ?

 

If not, does the light render as a standard light or a blend light (etc)?

 

Does it not render at all or not produce any fallback effect?

[duzenko 660]

Questions:

 

What kind of fallback happens if the mode or hardware doesn't support this shader?

Hardware not supported - undefined

 

Does this render the same way (using shadow maps) even when r_shadows = 1 ?

If using stencil shadows, no render

 

 

If not, does the light render as a standard light or a blend light (etc)?

It has its own code path

 

 

Does it not render at all or not produce any fallback effect?

Currently nothing at all but we can just ignore the shadows for the stencil case

[nbohr1more 2174]

Is code support for this in Trunk?

( I didn't see anything relevant in the darkmod_src commit log.)

[duzenko 660]

Is code support for this in Trunk?

( I didn't see anything relevant in the darkmod_src commit log.)

It's in its separate github branch

https://github.com/duzenko/darkmod-experiments/tree/VolumetricLights

[nbohr1more 2174]

Thanks for the confirmation.

 

I was pretty sure this is a 2.08 feature but I didn't want to get the 2.07 wiki (etc) wrong.

[peter_spy 1603]

Btw. Duzenko, did you manage to solve performance problems with higher sample value?

[peter_spy 1603]

Duzenko, if you plan working on this further, now I have something more of an actual map scene / environment to test light shafts:

 

[duzenko 660]

Btw. Duzenko, did you manage to solve performance problems with higher sample value?

Not really

I guess we can target this as an option for high-end systems

 

Duzenko, if you plan working on this further, now I have something more of an actual map scene / environment to test light shafts:

 

Sure

[peter_spy 1603]

I think it would be great to have it, even if it was just an experimental feature. It's too good to pass up, IMO.

[Tafferboy 7]

Duzenko, if you plan working on this further, now I have something more of an actual map scene / environment to test light shafts:

in the above screenshot how did you place the bounce light so it didn't overlap into adjacent rooms, I assume its a noshadows light?