whats the point of 3d textures?

Started by
7 comments, last by paulbird 21 years ago
Has anyone ever used 3d textures - if so what for?
Advertisement
Yes, I beleive people have actually . Here''s one example of a good use for a 3d texture. Say you''re writing a landscape engine (terrain engine). Rather then blending multiple textures over a single quad... (what if you have 3 different types on a single quad, that''s 3 redraws!) you have a 3d texture consisting of all the layers you want (in the order that they will blend) and you can set the correct coordinates in your quad, and blend however many of the layers you need in a single pass. I havent'' really seen many other uses for it, maybe another use would be something like... what if you wanted a completely deformable wall. You could use a 3d texture, so when you remove "chunks" from the wall (which can be done dynamically with splitting the wall triangles) you can modify the depth value of the 3d texture, so you can actually see the "inside" of the walls. (This scenario is best visualized with a brick wall, where when things hit it, they could easily be dislodged and the inside of the wall would be solid). Another use, could possibly be for a simulation of sorts, what about a disection simulation, where the 3d textuer holds the insides of a frog, and you could "slice" it however you wanted to be able to see the inners. There are PLENTY of uses for 3d textures if you put your mind to it. Sure, 99% of the people have no use for them, but it doesn''t mean it''s useless .
I''ve been wondering about this as well. What about performance - is there a big performance gain involved?
"Literally, it means that Bob is everything you can think of, but not dead; i.e., Bob is a purple-spotted, yellow-striped bumblebee/dragon/pterodactyl hybrid with a voracious addiction to Twix candy bars, but not dead."- kSquared
I''ve also used it for 3D visualization of data (satelite/MRI/etc). Instead of rendering a bunch of polys for volume visualization, you instead can render to a texture, and then apply that texture. It''s basically using texture memory instead of trying to push a boat load of geometry (as 3D viz tools must often do).

Cheers.

- sighuh?
- sighuh?
Crispy: Performance gain, compared to what??

I haven''t really used 3D textures myself, but I''ve fiddled around with the idea of it.

The only problem with 3D textures is that they consume SOOO much memory!
Yep, and the fact that they aren''t hardware accelerated (yet). So they''ll probably end up being slower than just using multiple passes (however, with multitexturing and regcoms [and vertex shaders], you can do it in one pass).

-------------------
Realm Games Company
-------------------Realm Games Company
They aren''t hardware accelerated yet? Are you for real? It would take barely anything extra for the manufacturer to add this into their already vast engine. They are already interpolating the texture x,y coords, they''d just have to interpolate a third z coordinate, and implement tri-linear filtering of a 3d texture isntead of using the bilinear of a 2d texture. If you''ve ever written a 3d engine with texturing, you''d know how simple it''d be to interpolate another variable (like they do for vertex colors, etc). I don''t see why they wouldn''t have implemented this yet, as it''s pretty easy to do using the current type of rendering engine being used .
GF3+ cards support 3D texturing.

Death of one is a tragedy, death of a million is just a statistic.
If at first you don't succeed, redefine success.
Lemme clear what I said up: they are support by hardware, but they are extrememly slow (as if they aren''t hardware accelerated, excuse me). Ever tried using them? I expect this card could run them very nicely tho...
-------------------Realm Games Company

This topic is closed to new replies.

Advertisement