Jump to content
  • Advertisement

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

jpeter

new bumpmapping ?

This topic is 5418 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Advertisement
That looks SO impressive.

I''ve always found bump mapping only works with moving lights sources or heavy specular lighting, but with this it actually looks displaced from the plane...very effective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It''s rather displacement mapping than bump mapping IMO.
The fragements are displaced, so...


-* So many things to do, so little time to spend. *-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well it displaces the bump-map and the texture map so effectively the fragments you end up with are displaced versions of the fragment you would've got without the bump-map and texture map displacement.

I also agree is looks very impressive, nice and simple to implement as well

[edited by - Monder on January 13, 2004 2:29:01 PM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hmm.. now i just have to figure out whats wrong. that demo is looking flat for offset mapping and the combination looks like pure bump mapping. fragment program loads without any errors, the lighting part is working well but somehow the new tex coords are the same as the original ones *confused*.. did i mention its a pain to debug vertex/fragment programs? ,-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is completely OT, but a little while ago I thought it could be worth making a version of Mesa GL that allows you to easily debug fragment and vertex programs, I believe Mesa GL supports ARB_fragment_shader and ARB_vertex_shader, so all you need to add is the bit that allows you to debug shader code, it''d be even better if it could debug Cg or GlSlang and link straight into VC++, I don''t think I''ve got the skill to do it though, but if someone did do it, it could become a very useful tool (especially as vertex and fragment programs become longer and more complex).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
It is NOT displacement mapping - that physically offsets your surfaces. This simply perturbs your lookup into your texture maps (you have to perturb all lookups, be they bump, colour, specular, luminousity, etc). It gives the effect of parallax by compressing opposing faces into almost impossible to see pixels.

This is one damned impressive technique and will no doubt find its way into many commercial engines. Bump mapping made great - I always hated it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trienco, I tried the demo myself and got the same result as you. Offset mapping looks flat, and the combination looks just like bump mapping. I''m running it on a Radeon 9800, so it should support everything the demo needs. Wierd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

We are the game development community.

Whether you are an indie, hobbyist, AAA developer, or just trying to learn, GameDev.net is the place for you to learn, share, and connect with the games industry. Learn more About Us or sign up!

Sign me up!