V8jester Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 1 minute ago, RaffaCT14 said: AHHH!!! Attack of the eel thingy's! As if the Kraken wasn't bad enough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackrack Posted January 26, 2016 Author Share Posted January 26, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, RaffaCT14 said: That problem appears only with opengl, when I play without it there are only a lot of artifacts. I'll wait the new version of the mod. Thank you for the help yesterday! Those are just tears in the fabric of space and time. KSP was not meant mean to have this kind of shader, the space-time continuum has been broken... But seriously, I don't know what's causing these yet but the good thing is that I now get them from time to time so I might be able to fix them one of these days. Edited: I'll just leave this here: Edited January 27, 2016 by blackrack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8jester Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 52 minutes ago, blackrack said: Those are just tears in the fabric of space and time. KSP was not meant mean to have this kind of shader, the space-time continuum has been broken... But seriously, I don't know what's causing these yet but the good thing is that I now get them from time to time so I might be able to fix them one of these days. Edited: I'll just leave this here: I think I love you...... Nope I thought about it, just very platonic affection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackrack Posted January 27, 2016 Author Share Posted January 27, 2016 Here are some more cherrypicked screens Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nhawks17 Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 Soon enough "Scatterer" is going to need a new name Feel like you're going beyond just atmo scattering now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackrack Posted January 27, 2016 Author Share Posted January 27, 2016 9 minutes ago, Nhawks17 said: Soon enough "Scatterer" is going to need a new name Feel like you're going beyond just atmo scattering now Well, I thought about it, but couldn't come up with a name catchier than scatterer suggestions welcome. Btw I'm gonna need some opinions here. Here are godrays rendered at 1/4 resolution and upscaled: http://i.imgur.com/mRb54bZ.jpg http://i.imgur.com/rwq9WoX.jpg (ignore the topmost aliasing artifacts) And here rendered at native resolution: http://i.imgur.com/aHBRtCn.jpg http://i.imgur.com/jeUv8ap.jpg Somehow I find the lower resolution gives them a more volumetric and natural feel while the crisp high resolution betrays their polygonal nature and takes away from the effect. Opinions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errol Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 The real question is will eve clouds cause god rays? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Kerman Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 39 minutes ago, blackrack said: Somehow I find the lower resolution gives them a more volumetric and natural feel while the crisp high resolution betrays their polygonal nature and takes away from the effect. Opinions? lower res definitely gives off a "softer" look that feels more natural to me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nhawks17 Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 I too prefer the low res version better, like Gaiiden pointed out the higher resolution definitely looks kinda rough compared to the low res. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proteus Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 this is what happens when you play with eve and scatter setting too much i turned kebrin into small gas giant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m4ti140 Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 Without the proper terrain shading (i.e. with sun side of mountains still alit despite being in the shadow of bigger mountains) the godrays look a bit out of place Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul_Sawyer Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 I vote for 1/4 resolution too, it definitely looks much more natural. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Val Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 7 hours ago, blackrack said: Somehow I find the lower resolution gives them a more volumetric and natural feel while the crisp high resolution betrays their polygonal nature and takes away from the effect. Opinions? The quarter res, does look softer. Is it not possible to increase the width of the fuzziness on the high res ones, to make them similarly soft? Either way. Amazing work, blackrack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackrack Posted January 27, 2016 Author Share Posted January 27, 2016 9 hours ago, Errol said: The real question is will eve clouds cause god rays? Well this only works with geometry and also assumes any point in the screen will only go once into the light and once into the shadow, i.e objects in mid-air will break it. 3 hours ago, m4ti140 said: Without the proper terrain shading (i.e. with sun side of mountains still alit despite being in the shadow of bigger mountains) the godrays look a bit out of place You're totally right but there is nothing I can do about the terrain shading right now. These godrays are based on shadow volumes (think shadows in doom3) which I guess I could use for shadows but I'm not sure how to do that. 1 hour ago, Val said: The quarter res, does look softer. Is it not possible to increase the width of the fuzziness on the high res ones, to make them similarly soft? Either way. Amazing work, blackrack. Currently there isn't, but I'll try to come up with something. I was just experimenting with this to see if a little blurriness would help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sashan Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 Could you adjust the craft ambient illumination amount depending on where it is? If it's inside one of the shadows it should be darker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackrack Posted January 27, 2016 Author Share Posted January 27, 2016 Just now, sashan said: Could you adjust the craft ambient illumination amount depending on where it is? If it's inside one of the shadows it should be darker. When I figure out terrain shadows this should be easy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HafCoJoe Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 Lol - Seeing all these artifact posts is reminding me of this one Princess Bride scene. ^-^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8jester Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 16 minutes ago, Avera9eJoe said: Lol - Seeing all these artifact posts is reminding me of this one Princess Bride scene. ^-^ That's completely Inconceivable! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sashan Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 1 hour ago, blackrack said: When I figure out terrain shadows this should be easy. I mean, besides butting a shadow on it and "turning off" the sunlight the ambient lightning level should become darker. I mean the lightning that is used to render the ships in planet shadow, for example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Rocket Scientist Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 On 1/27/2016 at 5:39 PM, blackrack said: Well, I thought about it, but couldn't come up with a name catchier than scatterer suggestions welcome. Btw I'm gonna need some opinions here. Here are godrays rendered at 1/4 resolution and upscaled: http://i.imgur.com/mRb54bZ.jpg http://i.imgur.com/rwq9WoX.jpg (ignore the topmost aliasing artifacts) And here rendered at native resolution: http://i.imgur.com/aHBRtCn.jpg http://i.imgur.com/jeUv8ap.jpg Somehow I find the lower resolution gives them a more volumetric and natural feel while the crisp high resolution betrays their polygonal nature and takes away from the effect. Opinions? 1/4 res, definitely! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackrack Posted January 28, 2016 Author Share Posted January 28, 2016 (edited) So unfortunately, the method I'm using for extruding volumes for the godrays doesn't play well with all meshes resulting in many "holes" and instability in the geometry. This would be easily fixed if there was a possibility to access neighboring normals in a vertex shader but as far as I know this isn't possible. Extruding the terrain geometry on the CPU is also out of the question for terrain of that scale and especially for KSP's tight CPU budget. This is unfortunate as this method is very fast, I might still release but it will always have holes and artifacts in it. The issue can be seen in these screens on the box on the left. In the end I might give shadow maps a try and then I'll be able to use them for terrain and for godrays (as per this paper http://www.moving-picture.com/documents/VolumetricShadowMapping.pdf) but I feel it's going to be much slower for real-time. On the upside it will look fuzzier and "more volumetric" than current method. Edited January 28, 2016 by blackrack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proot Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 (edited) If may I ask... from where you "take" the terrain volumes? Maybe... could you "fill" the geometry gaps using the low poly model used in scaled space? Probably the result will be not acurate, but nearest to the real mesh? Just an idea, I don't know if it is possible. EDIT: btw, with Kopernicus you can generate a .bin with the lowpoly mesh of the bodies. Edited January 28, 2016 by Proot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbray89 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 17 minutes ago, blackrack said: So unfortunately, the method I'm using for extruding volumes for the godrays doesn't play well with all meshes resulting in many "holes" and instability in the geometry. This would be easily fixed if there was a possibility to access neighboring normals in a vertex shader but as far as I know this isn't possible. Extruding the terrain geometry on the CPU is also out of the question for terrain of that scale and especially for KSP's tight CPU budget. This is unfortunate as this method is very fast, I might still release but it will always have holes and artifacts in it. The issue can be seen in these screens on the box on the left. In the end I might give shadow maps a try and then I'll be able to use them for terrain and for godrays (as per this paper http://www.moving-picture.com/documents/VolumetricShadowMapping.pdf) but I feel it's going to be much slower for real-time. On the upside it will look fuzzier and "more volumetric" than current method. Cool! I was wondering how you were doing that. I assume you extrude vertices that maintain normal perpendicular to the ray? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackrack Posted January 28, 2016 Author Share Posted January 28, 2016 (edited) 30 minutes ago, Proot said: If may I ask... from where you "take" the terrain volumes? Maybe... could you "fill" the geometry gaps using the low poly model used in scaled space? Probably the result will be not acurate, but nearest to the real mesh? Just an idea, I don't know if it is possible. EDIT: btw, with Kopernicus you can generate a .bin with the lowpoly mesh of the bodies. Well, the problem is, these gaps only appear after extrusion and there is no real way to check for them. Besides, the geometry is taken directly from a duplicate camera using a replacement shader, so I don't really pass the geometry around or anything, it's why it's fast. Edited: the gaps actually appear in the godrays, the objects are not a problem, gaps also "fill" and "empty" with a moving light source. 30 minutes ago, rbray89 said: Cool! I was wondering how you were doing that. I assume you extrude vertices that maintain normal perpendicular to the ray? Exactly, the code is very simple: float backFactor = dot( toLight, v.normal ); float extrude = (backFactor < 0.0) ? 1.0 : 0.0; v.vertex.xyz -= toLight * (extrude * extrusionLength); But as you can see it doesn't work well for all meshes. It's enough to introduce distracting gaps in the effect. Some people may not notice though and it may look good in some screenshots so I'll probably still release it as an option I've looked around and basically the only way to fix this is to check neighboring edges and faces which can't be done in the vertex shader or alter the geometry by adding additional quads, which also can't be done in the vertex shader. Not sure if there is something else I'm missing. Edited January 28, 2016 by blackrack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidfu Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 so eve and scatter are no longer compatiable since they both use shaders? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.