OpenGL Designing a Renderer

This topic is 4335 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

Recommended Posts

I've spent a lot of time thinking about different ways to design a renderer. I've looked at a lot of examples, and have a few books lying around the house as well. But alas, I have a few questions, and I just would like to basically have them clarified. What's better than coming here to ask the questions? I'm still trying to grasp the difference between Fixed Function Pipeline and Programmable Pipeline. I think most of the tutorials I have seen (in books and online) have been examples of programmable pipelines, but I really don't know the difference. I know that programmable pipelines include Shaders, but I am sure that is not the only difference, right? I am also rather sure that the OpenGL tutorials that NeHe has are all Fixed Function? If there are any good books that illstrate the difference I would be glad to know of them! I've been searching Amazon for a few, and it seems this one seems pretty relevant to what I am looking for. What's the most efficient way to design a renderer and have it expandable? I am guessing that something like the following?:
HandleMessage();

Clear();
BeginFrame();
For All->Draw();
EndFrame();

Events();
Input();


Thanks a lot everyone!

Share on other sites
Ok, a quick explanation would be, a fixed function pipeline has a bunch of fixed functions (wow really?! :-p) that you can configure and then the vert data is pushed through those functions. With a programmable pipeline instead of just pushing it through the fixed hardware functions, you can set programs (shaders) that the verts will be pushed through (i.e.: the program will run on each vert) this is for vertex shaders. Further down the pipeline the pixel/fragment shader will run on all the fragments that were generated for the given frame, again instead of just going through the standard texturing hardware functions, a program is run on each fragment (a pixel/fragment shader).

If you looking to learn Shader programming I'd recommend "The Cg Tutorial", tho this doesn't explain how to architect a renderer or engine to encapsulate the programmable pipeline. Infact it doesn't even deal with the Cg run-time thats left as an exercise for the reader.

With regard to your post about designing a renderer, the way you say is basically how most renderers work, i.e.: they have a list of stuff to draw and they run through it and draw it. You have to supply a renderer with everything its going to need to draw the given primitive, i.e.: vert data, textures, shaders, whatever. Of course there are ways to make the renderer more efficient, for instance, grouping those primitives that make use of the same shader program or materials, so your not constantly binding and unbinding the same shaders to the video card, same goes for material properties, although i wouldn't worry about material sorting until you've got something up and running.

NeHe stuff is all fixed function yes, unless he explicitly mentions using Shader programs which I believe he does around lesson 45 IIRC? As for books, check out:

(the afore mentioned) The Cg Tutorial - Randima Fernando & Mark J. Kilgard
3D Engine Architecture - David H. Elberly

The first 2 will give you a decent grounding in shader programming, and the last gives you an idea of what it takes to architect a well structured and extendible multi-API renderer.

Once you get a renderer up and running, your probrably going to want to look into some scene management to cut down what your actually sending to the renderer for drawing (no point attempting to draw things you can't see right?) so you'll want to check out scenegraphs, frustum culling, occlusion culling, oct-trees, BSP (althought typically not used much for rendering more for collisions these days), all that stuff.

Hope this helps ;-)

Share on other sites
Ill try to add my knowlege.

As this is the renderer, it should only render, right?
So all transformations and stuff are already calculated?
If not, you need a parent object to transform the matrix before you draw the child objct (if you got any)...

The next thing is sorting. Objects with the same texture / shader should be drawed in order to reduce texture / shader switching... (might not be an issue if not to heavy graphics).

Who is responsible for deciding if an object is visible? If its behind the camera, the renderer could do this, but if its for example inside a box, or to far away, you should not try to render it (and rely on that the distance cap removes them).

What i heard people do it that the renderer infact is only a smart queue!
When your logic decides that an object should be rendered, it passes the object to a rendering queue, witch you can flush at the end of the frame.

This is great because then your renderer is independant of your scenegraph structure, and objects can be sorted when they are added to the queue.
If you need z sorting (witch is good when doing pixel shaders (draw closest first) or if you want transparency) you can easely modify the order of your rendering whitout affecting any other part of the system. You could also have flags like: IS_SHADOW(draw me last) or IS_EFFECT(draw me even later)

The drawback is that you cant use matrix push and pop directly with this approach (that is if you have "child" objects), so you need to calculate the transformation of the object, and then add the saved transformation matrix with the object to the renderqueue. This might give some overhead if thousands of objects...

So now you have a encapsulated renderer with the simple interface:

-enqueue(object,flag)
-flush()

totaly separated from your logics and scenegraph...
it takes care of order and optimalisation by itselfe, and this is hidden from the rest of the system.

-long post

-anders

Share on other sites
Its quite common for the algorithm requesting objects to be rendered to be able to trivialy iterate through geometry with common materials .. such as iterating through all the grass blades in the scene.

It would be wasteful to change the problem to something less trivial under the banner of being 'generic'

Some geometry will be part of a "set" .. in such cases, its the SET which should have a render method in order to take advantage of the priori knowledge of common materials.

Other geometry will NOT be part of a "set" in the sense of common materials even though they may be part of a set. For instance, the set of all agents in the world. Each has a dynamic model. It is ONLY these sets here that really should have the whole queue-it-up-and-sort-by-material strategy.

So I believe that the overall design of the rendering system should be capable of both queing up render requests AS WELL AS exposing API specific features that allow the caller to directly leverage batching on its own in those cases where its obvious that a generic queue system is sub-optimal.

• 12
• 10
• 11
• 18
• 13
• Similar Content

• Good Evening,
I want to make a 2D game which involves displaying some debug information. Especially for collision, enemy sights and so on ...
First of I was thinking about all those shapes which I need will need for debugging purposes: circles, rectangles, lines, polygons.
I am really stucked right now because of the fundamental question:
Where do I store my vertices positions for each line (object)? Currently I am not using a model matrix because I am using orthographic projection and set the final position within the VBO. That means that if I add a new line I would have to expand the "points" array and re-upload (recall glBufferData) it every time. The other method would be to use a model matrix and a fixed vbo for a line but it would be also messy to exactly create a line from (0,0) to (100,20) calculating the rotation and scale to make it fit.
If I proceed with option 1 "updating the array each frame" I was thinking of having 4 draw calls every frame for the lines vao, polygons vao and so on.
In addition to that I am planning to use some sort of ECS based architecture. So the other question would be:
Should I treat those debug objects as entities/components?
For me it would make sense to treat them as entities but that's creates a new issue with the previous array approach because it would have for example a transform and render component. A special render component for debug objects (no texture etc) ... For me the transform component is also just a matrix but how would I then define a line?
Treating them as components would'nt be a good idea in my eyes because then I would always need an entity. Well entity is just an id !? So maybe its a component?
Regards,
LifeArtist
• By QQemka
Hello. I am coding a small thingy in my spare time. All i want to achieve is to load a heightmap (as the lowest possible walking terrain), some static meshes (elements of the environment) and a dynamic character (meaning i can move, collide with heightmap/static meshes and hold a varying item in a hand ). Got a bunch of questions, or rather problems i can't find solution to myself. Nearly all are deal with graphics/gpu, not the coding part. My c++ is on high enough level.
Let's go:
Heightmap - i obviously want it to be textured, size is hardcoded to 256x256 squares. I can't have one huge texture stretched over entire terrain cause every pixel would be enormous. Thats why i decided to use 2 specified textures. First will be a tileset consisting of 16 square tiles (u v range from 0 to 0.25 for first tile and so on) and second a 256x256 buffer with 0-15 value representing index of the tile from tileset for every heigtmap square. Problem is, how do i blend the edges nicely and make some computationally cheap changes so its not obvious there are only 16 tiles? Is it possible to generate such terrain with some existing program?
Collisions - i want to use bounding sphere and aabb. But should i store them for a model or entity instance? Meaning i have 20 same trees spawned using the same tree model, but every entity got its own transformation (position, scale etc). Storing collision component per instance grats faster access + is precalculated and transformed (takes additional memory, but who cares?), so i stick with this, right? What should i do if object is dynamically rotated? The aabb is no longer aligned and calculating per vertex min/max everytime object rotates/scales is pretty expensive, right?
Drawing aabb - problem similar to above (storing aabb data per instance or model). This time in my opinion per model is enough since every instance also does not have own vertex buffer but uses the shared one (so 20 trees share reference to one tree model). So rendering aabb is about taking the model's aabb, transforming with instance matrix and voila. What about aabb vertex buffer (this is more of a cosmetic question, just curious, bumped onto it in time of writing this). Is it better to make it as 8 points and index buffer (12 lines), or only 2 vertices with min/max x/y/z and having the shaders dynamically generate 6 other vertices and draw the box? Or maybe there should be just ONE 1x1x1 cube box template moved/scaled per entity?
What if one model got a diffuse texture and a normal map, and other has only diffuse? Should i pass some bool flag to shader with that info, or just assume that my game supports only diffuse maps without fancy stuff?
There were several more but i forgot/solved them at time of writing
• By RenanRR
Hi All,
I'm reading the tutorials from learnOpengl site (nice site) and I'm having a question on the camera (https://learnopengl.com/Getting-started/Camera).
I always saw the camera being manipulated with the lookat, but in tutorial I saw the camera being changed through the MVP arrays, which do not seem to be camera, but rather the scene that changes:
#version 330 core layout (location = 0) in vec3 aPos; layout (location = 1) in vec2 aTexCoord; out vec2 TexCoord; uniform mat4 model; uniform mat4 view; uniform mat4 projection; void main() { gl_Position = projection * view * model * vec4(aPos, 1.0f); TexCoord = vec2(aTexCoord.x, aTexCoord.y); } then, the matrix manipulated:
..... glm::mat4 projection = glm::perspective(glm::radians(fov), (float)SCR_WIDTH / (float)SCR_HEIGHT, 0.1f, 100.0f); ourShader.setMat4("projection", projection); .... glm::mat4 view = glm::lookAt(cameraPos, cameraPos + cameraFront, cameraUp); ourShader.setMat4("view", view); .... model = glm::rotate(model, glm::radians(angle), glm::vec3(1.0f, 0.3f, 0.5f)); ourShader.setMat4("model", model);
So, some doubts:
- Why use it like that?
- Is it okay to manipulate the camera that way?
-in this way, are not the vertex's positions that changes instead of the camera?
- I need to pass MVP to all shaders of object in my scenes ?

What it seems, is that the camera stands still and the scenery that changes...
it's right?

Thank you

• Sampling a floating point texture where the alpha channel holds 4-bytes of packed data into the float. I don't know how to cast the raw memory to treat it as an integer so I can perform bit-shifting operations.

int rgbValue = int(textureSample.w);//4 bytes of data packed as color
// algorithm might not be correct and endianness might need switching.
vec3 extractedData = vec3(  rgbValue & 0xFF000000,  (rgbValue << 8) & 0xFF000000, (rgbValue << 16) & 0xFF000000);
extractedData /= 255.0f;

• While writing a simple renderer using OpenGL, I faced an issue with the glGetUniformLocation function. For some reason, the location is coming to be -1.
Anyone has any idea .. what should I do?