Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Volumetric rendering engine or library


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
3 replies to this topic

#1 StrangeQuirk   Members   -  Reputation: 101

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 26 October 2012 - 11:11 AM

I'm playing around with fluid simulation and want to extend my 2D grid-based simulation into 3D; I'm not too interested in the graphical side of things, though. Does anybody have any suggestions for simple, fast rendering engines with volume rendering, that would require the minimum of work to interface with my C++ simulation? I want to be able to pass it a 3D grid of densitites (i.e. smoke density) and have it render it with minimal intervention on my side.

Sponsor:

#2 PolyVox   Members   -  Reputation: 708

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 26 October 2012 - 02:08 PM

You can check out: http://www.visualizationlibrary.org/
Also VTK might be interesting but it's quite heavyweight: http://www.vtk.org/

They'll both require some significant integration work I think...

#3 Butabee   Members   -  Reputation: 238

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 27 October 2012 - 12:41 AM

Currently working on a volume based rasterization library... It essentially just maps a 3D texture to a triangle cube with correct perspective on he GPU. Not sure when I'll release it. There are still more features I want to add to it. It should be faster than ray casting methods. If you don't need something in a hurry, keep an eye out.

#4 ATEFred   Members   -  Reputation: 1132

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 29 October 2012 - 11:17 AM

Depending on what you want to do, it might just be quicker to write your own volume renderer, assuming you already have a simple shader based renderer. If you have access to compute shaders, it is trivial to setup a shader which finds intersections in between your volume box / primitive and your camera rays, and step through each voxel in between those points. Or you can raterize a box with the correct UVs for your voxels both front and back face, and then use the resulting rts to know the exact start and end uvs for each ray. More work to get going, but no math and might be faster, depending on your volume primitives.




Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS