Jump to content
  • Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  
nippbit

subdivision of geometry for use in lighting

This topic is 5034 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

Hello all, Is it truely faster to use light maps or wouldn't it be faster to implement a precomputed geometric subdivision similiar to the way lighting was done in the OLD doom and quake series, only automate it using basic shadow volumes coliding with the faces, then further subdivide the faces and assign an ambient diffuse value to these vertices? Furthermore, you could assign a theta component to subdivide for a falloff period in the "shadow geometry". Combined with shadow maps, I could see this as a real powerful technique because of the raw processing power of the GPU on most systems. You can then reuse the shadow volumes for real time shadow casting using the Z-Pass or Fail routine(Carmack's reverse), which, in all honesty, is something I would like to avoid for now simply because I'm a lowly little developer running a poor graphics card. The major drawback is that you can not support animated meshs(levels) with this, unless you use Z-Fail/Pass algorithm. Has anyone seen any papers on any material like this? -Ken Noland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
Well, It might work..
But..
If you're fill limited you might want to do what you suggested, but if you're geometry limited you're probably much better off with lightmaps..
It's all about balance..
Some solution might be good in one situation, but horrible in another..
In the end it's better to only bother looking into these kind of things when you need it..
See it as an optimization.. and you know what they say about early optimisations..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well,

This is a special type of optimization that I need to determine early on in the project, I've already started working on it and it should be done within the next week. I'll publish my results when I'm through, but I'll need some help.

I have a severe hardware limitation, simply because my primary development machine didn't survive the trip from New York to Seattle. I could generate the test application, but I don't have any decent hardware to run it on... any help, anyone???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chances are you have atleast a Voodoo2 card (I hope) which means you can do atleast 2 textures in one pass. Given that it would almost certainly be faster, even on a low end card, to use lightmaps rather then subdivide your geometry. If, however, you are working on a software engine then the reverse might be true.
Subdividing geometry MAY give you better looking results depending on your shadow casters and lightmap texture budget.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ahh, but sending detailed textures over the bus can cause extreme performance issues. I tested it out on a VooDoo 5, and it was actually faster adding over 500 polys then it was to do dual textures. I've got a new machine on order... I will have a better machine soon to do my testing on.

Thanks :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • 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!