<!--QuoteBegin-Talesin+Feb 4 2005, 10:30 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Talesin @ Feb 4 2005, 10:30 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> No, HDR is kind of like the glossmap that currently exists on tile and whatnot, in HL2... but on crack. It allows for 'auras' around a window, if light is spilling through it. Soft glows, shiny tin, glittering sunshine through rain.
It's a poor-man's compensation for basic radiosity and light refraction, essentially... and it would look WONDERFUL. A real-time rainbow off sea foam mist, anyone? A warmly-lit room from sunlight spilling against thin drapes? At least, that's the kind of thing I've seen HDR be capable of.
I'll post a link to a site with plenty of mini-demos, once I get back from dinner.
(edit) <a href='http://www.debevec.org/' target='_blank'>http://www.debevec.org/</a> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> No, high dynamic range is simply that, a large range of colour intensities far beyond what your monitor possibly can display. The point of HDR is to then take this and do interesting operations on it such as simulating the brightness adaption of the eye by choosing how this HDR image is mapped to the screen since you only have 3 8-bit colours as output.
This would be truly awesome in a game like NS with highly contrasting lights, You could have bright areas from which the dark vents and similar are hard to see and allmost black no matter how much you try and cheat by increasing your gamma, but while you are in these dark areas you can see the outside as slightly overbrightened and your (dark) surroundings in good detail.
Bloom doesn't strictly speaking even require HDR, it could be generated from a regular image as has been done with some HL MODs and still look OK. This is _not_ HDR allthough it does take advantage of being used with HDR as there is no cap for how bright objects can be which reduces unnecessary glow from objects which are not that very brightly lit.
It won't run well, but it will run, and thats the importent thing <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
TalesinOur own little well of hateJoin Date: 2002-11-08Member: 7710NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators
Yes... all those shiny roofing tiles, as well as the monster standing there were HDRI enabled. Looks like they finally got it working for the masses. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> Would have been more of a slam-dunk against Doom3 if it'd been there from the start, but it's great that they're continuing to improve the engine, rather than only bugfixing. What's next... stencil shadows?
I needs me new hardware <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Talesin+Feb 5 2005, 10:05 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Talesin @ Feb 5 2005, 10:05 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Congrats! Your hardware is officially well on its way to being outdated.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Name me a piece of hardware that isn't, in a timeframe of more than a year or two. Which isn't really that long.
That one will also be fast on its way to being outdated in two years or so. Mark my words. Also, I'm a bit disgruntled that this is being made available to everyone for themselves to judge.
QuaunautThe longest seven days in history...Join Date: 2003-03-21Member: 14759Members, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow
<!--QuoteBegin-TychoCelchuuu+Feb 5 2005, 07:26 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TychoCelchuuu @ Feb 5 2005, 07:26 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The best HDR I saw in the Source engine was the example with the horse statue. The sun shining between its legs would "overglow" the legs so to speak.
And Doomy, Source does real time lighting perfectly fine. It's the shadowing that it's not so great at. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Though, and I quote a Source Interview:
"Yeah, it could definately be put in with a mod. Easily even, I'd say."
Bloom itself is NOT HDR, HDR is just the use of a higher precision frame buffer. You can have a frame buffer with a high dynamic range without doing the slightest bit interesting with it all.
Case in point, HL2 didn't have HDR at all when released, the glow at the end of those tunnels was just a big additive sprite with higher alpha as you get closer, the effect where the sun 'glows' through the horse statues legs is not using HDR, it's just a neat little trick using pixel shaders.
On top of that, HL2's high dynamic range wasn't very high at all, was(still is?) integer based, where you preferably would want floating point of some sort allthough this may cause all sorts of problems with current cards(e.g. no AA).
Here's a <a href='http://www.daionet.gr.jp/~masa/rthdribl/' target='_blank'>demo</a> of HDR, as well as an <a href='http://img228.exs.cx/img228/734/rthdribl8gr.jpg' target='_blank'>example image</a>, from <a href='http://www.imageshack.us/' target='_blank'>Imageshack</a>.
Bah, nuff about lighting. Does anyone know any good rumours about the demo's content? So far I see some nice sketches... <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
TalesinOur own little well of hateJoin Date: 2002-11-08Member: 7710NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators
I'm guessing there's a fisherman in it somewhere. Now, back to lighting- <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Damn that's quotable, Tal. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> I can just see everyone here at the press conference:
Gabe Newell: "Ok, so the demo features a brand new creature call the wagglabla---"
Crowd: "SHUT UP YOU FAEC GABE TALK MORE 'BOUT DA GLOWIES!!!!!!!!"
AbraWould you kindlyJoin Date: 2003-08-17Member: 19870Members
<!--QuoteBegin-MonsieurEvil+Feb 5 2005, 08:21 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (MonsieurEvil @ Feb 5 2005, 08:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Damn that's quotable, Tal. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> I can just see everyone here at the press conference:
Gabe Newell: "Ok, so the demo features a brand new creature call the wagglabla---"
Crowd: "SHUT UP YOU FAEC GABE TALK MORE 'BOUT DA GLOWIES!!!!!!!!"
Gabe Newell: "I hate you $%^&@ geeks..." <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> the last line should be edited out, as he properly would be chewing a burger at that moment.
<!--QuoteBegin-Soylent green+Feb 5 2005, 08:24 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Soylent green @ Feb 5 2005, 08:24 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Case in point, HL2 didn't have HDR at all when released, the glow at the end of those tunnels was just a big additive sprite with higher alpha as you get closer, the effect where the sun 'glows' through the horse statues legs is not using HDR, it's just a neat little trick using pixel shaders. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> As it is right now the glowy between the horses legs is a neat trick, but I thought that was the HDR demo where they specifically did it the right way and didn't cheat with the sprites.
Personally I'm more excited about having the frickin' <b>CROWBAR</b> back in deathmatch.
Plus content updates are good as well...
EDIT: And if you care about lighting and the like. Have a look at the <a href='http://www.richardrosenman.com/maxwell.htm' target='_blank'>Maxwell Renderer</a>
<!--QuoteBegin-TychoCelchuuu+Feb 5 2005, 08:26 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TychoCelchuuu @ Feb 5 2005, 08:26 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> And Doomy, Source does real time lighting perfectly fine. It's the shadowing that it's not so great at. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Walk outside and look around. Shadows are a very, very important part of lighting. Without shadows, lighting looks fake.
And thus, no, Source doesn't do real-time lighting perfectly fine.
<!--QuoteBegin-DOOManiac+Feb 6 2005, 12:17 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (DOOManiac @ Feb 6 2005, 12:17 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-TychoCelchuuu+Feb 5 2005, 08:26 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TychoCelchuuu @ Feb 5 2005, 08:26 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> And Doomy, Source does real time lighting perfectly fine. It's the shadowing that it's not so great at. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Walk outside and look around. Shadows are a very, very important part of lighting. Without shadows, lighting looks fake.
And thus, no, Source doesn't do real-time lighting perfectly fine. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> No, but with technology as it is, I'd artistically take Source's lightmaps over the Doom 3/Far Cry etc. approach.
Edit: And before this thread derails horrifically, let's leave it at that. To each his own.
<!--QuoteBegin-Infinitum+Feb 5 2005, 06:03 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Infinitum @ Feb 5 2005, 06:03 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Personally I'm more excited about having the frickin' <b>CROWBAR</b> back in deathmatch.
Plus content updates are good as well...
EDIT: And if you care about lighting and the like. Have a look at the <a href='http://www.richardrosenman.com/maxwell.htm' target='_blank'>Maxwell Renderer</a>
<img src='http://www.richardrosenman.com/gallery/maxwell_greeble11.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' /> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Oh god that is secksy.
Infinitum you have given me a sudden earge to replicate that in 3dsmax <!--emo&:0--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wow.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wow.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Infinitum+Feb 5 2005, 11:03 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Infinitum @ Feb 5 2005, 11:03 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Personally I'm more excited about having the frickin' <b>CROWBAR</b> back in deathmatch.
Plus content updates are good as well...
EDIT: And if you care about lighting and the like. Have a look at the <a href='http://www.richardrosenman.com/maxwell.htm' target='_blank'>Maxwell Renderer</a>
<!--QuoteBegin-TychoCelchuuu+Feb 5 2005, 02:06 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TychoCelchuuu @ Feb 5 2005, 02:06 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Soylent green+Feb 5 2005, 08:24 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Soylent green @ Feb 5 2005, 08:24 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Case in point, HL2 didn't have HDR at all when released, the glow at the end of those tunnels was just a big additive sprite with higher alpha as you get closer, the effect where the sun 'glows' through the horse statues legs is not using HDR, it's just a neat little trick using pixel shaders. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> As it is right now the glowy between the horses legs is a neat trick, but I thought that was the HDR demo where they specifically did it the right way and didn't cheat with the sprites. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes, if it was in the HDR demo, probably. But a similar effect IS in HL2 without HDR. And bloom is not in itself refered to as HDR anymore than apples are called pies.
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
<!--QuoteBegin-DOOManiac+Feb 5 2005, 06:17 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (DOOManiac @ Feb 5 2005, 06:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-TychoCelchuuu+Feb 5 2005, 08:26 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TychoCelchuuu @ Feb 5 2005, 08:26 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> And Doomy, Source does real time lighting perfectly fine. It's the shadowing that it's not so great at. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Walk outside and look around. Shadows are a very, very important part of lighting. Without shadows, lighting looks fake.
And thus, no, Source doesn't do real-time lighting perfectly fine. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Unfortunately, to have lighting as realistic as lighting in the source engine is, truly dynamic shadows would use far too much memory. Right now they are storing an rgb texture map, a greyscale specular map, an rgb normal map, then for each surface 3 rgb light maps (one for each normal component). In order to have truly dynamic shadows they would have to store at least a greyscale lightmap for each light for each surface. This is likely beyond what anyone can run at a decent speed on their computer. You could probably write a hack that would look decent (scan area for significant lights, flatten model geometry, project, subtract lightcolor/d^2 from the surface) but since so much of the light in source maps is indirect it still wouldn't be physically accurate.
Comments
It's a poor-man's compensation for basic radiosity and light refraction, essentially... and it would look WONDERFUL. A real-time rainbow off sea foam mist, anyone? A warmly-lit room from sunlight spilling against thin drapes? At least, that's the kind of thing I've seen HDR be capable of.
I'll post a link to a site with plenty of mini-demos, once I get back from dinner.
(edit) <a href='http://www.debevec.org/' target='_blank'>http://www.debevec.org/</a> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, high dynamic range is simply that, a large range of colour intensities far beyond what your monitor possibly can display. The point of HDR is to then take this and do interesting operations on it such as simulating the brightness adaption of the eye by choosing how this HDR image is mapped to the screen since you only have 3 8-bit colours as output.
This would be truly awesome in a game like NS with highly contrasting lights, You could have bright areas from which the dark vents and similar are hard to see and allmost black no matter how much you try and cheat by increasing your gamma, but while you are in these dark areas you can see the outside as slightly overbrightened and your (dark) surroundings in good detail.
Bloom doesn't strictly speaking even require HDR, it could be generated from a regular image as has been done with some HL MODs and still look OK. This is _not_ HDR allthough it does take advantage of being used with HDR as there is no cap for how bright objects can be which reduces unnecessary glow from objects which are not that very brightly lit.
Light and reflections have more range and brilliance.
For those that dont remember:
<img src='http://www.sourceofdoom.com/contenu/source/hl2/screenshots/hdr02_006.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://www.sourceofdoom.com/contenu/source/hl2/screenshots/hdr02_011.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://www.sourceofdoom.com/contenu/source/hl2/screenshots/hdr02_008.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
Would have been more of a slam-dunk against Doom3 if it'd been there from the start, but it's great that they're continuing to improve the engine, rather than only bugfixing. What's next... stencil shadows?
Name me a piece of hardware that isn't, in a timeframe of more than a year or two. Which isn't really that long.
And Doomy, Source does real time lighting perfectly fine. It's the shadowing that it's not so great at.
And Doomy, Source does real time lighting perfectly fine. It's the shadowing that it's not so great at. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Though, and I quote a Source Interview:
"Yeah, it could definately be put in with a mod. Easily even, I'd say."
Case in point, HL2 didn't have HDR at all when released, the glow at the end of those tunnels was just a big additive sprite with higher alpha as you get closer, the effect where the sun 'glows' through the horse statues legs is not using HDR, it's just a neat little trick using pixel shaders.
On top of that, HL2's high dynamic range wasn't very high at all, was(still is?) integer based, where you preferably would want floating point of some sort allthough this may cause all sorts of problems with current cards(e.g. no AA).
Gabe Newell: "Ok, so the demo features a brand new creature call the wagglabla---"
Crowd: "SHUT UP YOU FAEC GABE TALK MORE 'BOUT DA GLOWIES!!!!!!!!"
Gabe Newell: "I hate you $%^&@ geeks..."
Gabe Newell: "Ok, so the demo features a brand new creature call the wagglabla---"
Crowd: "SHUT UP YOU FAEC GABE TALK MORE 'BOUT DA GLOWIES!!!!!!!!"
Gabe Newell: "I hate you $%^&@ geeks..." <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
the last line should be edited out, as he properly would be chewing a burger at that moment.
sorry <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
MORE GLOWING!"!!!
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
As it is right now the glowy between the horses legs is a neat trick, but I thought that was the HDR demo where they specifically did it the right way and didn't cheat with the sprites.
Plus content updates are good as well...
EDIT: And if you care about lighting and the like. Have a look at the <a href='http://www.richardrosenman.com/maxwell.htm' target='_blank'>Maxwell Renderer</a>
<img src='http://www.richardrosenman.com/gallery/maxwell_greeble11.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
Walk outside and look around. Shadows are a very, very important part of lighting. Without shadows, lighting looks fake.
And thus, no, Source doesn't do real-time lighting perfectly fine.
Walk outside and look around. Shadows are a very, very important part of lighting. Without shadows, lighting looks fake.
And thus, no, Source doesn't do real-time lighting perfectly fine. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, but with technology as it is, I'd artistically take Source's lightmaps over the Doom 3/Far Cry etc. approach.
Edit: And before this thread derails horrifically, let's leave it at that. To each his own.
Plus content updates are good as well...
EDIT: And if you care about lighting and the like. Have a look at the <a href='http://www.richardrosenman.com/maxwell.htm' target='_blank'>Maxwell Renderer</a>
<img src='http://www.richardrosenman.com/gallery/maxwell_greeble11.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' /> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oh god that is secksy.
I have to agree.
I <3 my 9500pro
Plus content updates are good as well...
EDIT: And if you care about lighting and the like. Have a look at the <a href='http://www.richardrosenman.com/maxwell.htm' target='_blank'>Maxwell Renderer</a>
<img src='http://www.richardrosenman.com/gallery/maxwell_greeble11.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' /> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
O_______O
wow.. just.. wow O_o
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As it is right now the glowy between the horses legs is a neat trick, but I thought that was the HDR demo where they specifically did it the right way and didn't cheat with the sprites. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, if it was in the HDR demo, probably. But a similar effect IS in HL2 without HDR. And bloom is not in itself refered to as HDR anymore than apples are called pies.
Walk outside and look around. Shadows are a very, very important part of lighting. Without shadows, lighting looks fake.
And thus, no, Source doesn't do real-time lighting perfectly fine. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Unfortunately, to have lighting as realistic as lighting in the source engine is, truly dynamic shadows would use far too much memory. Right now they are storing an rgb texture map, a greyscale specular map, an rgb normal map, then for each surface 3 rgb light maps (one for each normal component). In order to have truly dynamic shadows they would have to store at least a greyscale lightmap for each light for each surface. This is likely beyond what anyone can run at a decent speed on their computer. You could probably write a hack that would look decent (scan area for significant lights, flatten model geometry, project, subtract lightcolor/d^2 from the surface) but since so much of the light in source maps is indirect it still wouldn't be physically accurate.