Hi,
I'm looking for a job as a technical artist but I decided to write a very simple real-time demo to show that I understand some concepts. I finished the first, rough version and it's time to know on which configurations it crashes:)
If you feel like testing it (and you are not scared) then please download it from here:
http://www.sharebigfile.com/file/184210/rem-demo-rar.html
Any comments are appreciated but please remember that I learned programming by myself while studying other things so my work cannot compete with professional programmers. And it's a work in progress.
Known issues:
- the GPU has to support 4096x4096 textures (if you know how to circumvent this, please let me know)
- the GPU has to have enough registers to store 20 bone matrices
[Edited by - therealremi on June 8, 2007 5:45:04 PM]
I need some brave testers:)
Author
Hi,
I'm looking for a job as a technical artist but I decided to write a very simple real-time demo to show that I understand some concepts. I finished the first, rough version and it's time to know on which configurations it crashes:)
If you feel like testing it (and you are not scared) then please download it from here:
http://www.sharebigfile.com/file/184210/rem-demo-rar.html
Any comments are appreciated but please remember that I learned programming by myself while studying other things so my work cannot compete with professional programmers. And it's a work in progress.
Known issues:
- the GPU has to support 4096x4096 textures (if you know how to circumvent this, please let me know)
- the GPU has to have enough registers to store 20 bone matrices
[Edited by - therealremi on June 8, 2007 5:45:04 PM]
I am absolutely unable to download the file, although I will try again in the morning.
In relation to the 4096x4096 texture thing, wouldn't you be able to break up the texture size into smaller tiles? And perhaps, if the geometry requires that large a texture, perhaps you could split it up into seperate meshes that fit the smaller tiles?
In relation to the 4096x4096 texture thing, wouldn't you be able to break up the texture size into smaller tiles? And perhaps, if the geometry requires that large a texture, perhaps you could split it up into seperate meshes that fit the smaller tiles?
Author
Hi Endar,
I'm looking for a better hosting currently.
Regarding these "huge" textures. From what I know most Radeons do not support them, and even very old Nvidia GPUs do. I decided to use them cause they are comfortable to work with in a 3d package and they increase batch size. Splitting meshes by hand may be cumbersome. I was looking for some simple way to split them automatically:)
And they look good:) I also thought that before I finish my demo 4096x4096 will be the standard size:)
I'm looking for a better hosting currently.
Regarding these "huge" textures. From what I know most Radeons do not support them, and even very old Nvidia GPUs do. I decided to use them cause they are comfortable to work with in a 3d package and they increase batch size. Splitting meshes by hand may be cumbersome. I was looking for some simple way to split them automatically:)
And they look good:) I also thought that before I finish my demo 4096x4096 will be the standard size:)
My apologies for the delay in response.
I gave your demo a try, and it looks good. However, I did find that the human model did some... strange things. The model became progressively more deformed as I recall, becoming terribly so when I attempted to activate the dancing.
You mention the GPU having enough registers to handle 20 bone matrices; as I have an old card (an FX5200), this may well be the problem.
The graphics were nicely done, however, I'd say! ^_^
I gave your demo a try, and it looks good. However, I did find that the human model did some... strange things. The model became progressively more deformed as I recall, becoming terribly so when I attempted to activate the dancing.
You mention the GPU having enough registers to handle 20 bone matrices; as I have an old card (an FX5200), this may well be the problem.
The graphics were nicely done, however, I'd say! ^_^
Just so you are aware, those 4096x4096 textures (at 32bit) are taking around 64MB of texture memory each. Ouch! I tried downloading the demo, but got lost on that download providors web page. The screen shot does look nice.
[Edited by - lubby on June 13, 2007 4:10:45 AM]
[Edited by - lubby on June 13, 2007 4:10:45 AM]
Quote:Original post by therealremi
Hi Endar,
I'm looking for a better hosting currently.
Regarding these "huge" textures. From what I know most Radeons do not support them, and even very old Nvidia GPUs do. I decided to use them cause they are comfortable to work with in a 3d package and they increase batch size. Splitting meshes by hand may be cumbersome. I was looking for some simple way to split them automatically:)
And they look good:) I also thought that before I finish my demo 4096x4096 will be the standard size:)
Considering you're applying for the position of technical artist, that statement is a little scary. I've always found that one of the key tasks of a technical artist is to work with the coders to help explain engine and technology limitations to the rest of the art-department, and help them work around them.
You could probably do some form of export-time breaking, but you'd probably end up with a less optimized version than if you'd done it yourself the first time around..
And unless you plan for a similar development schedule to Duke Nukem, you'll still need to deal with legacy hardware :)
Allan
Most people run their games at 1024x768 and then there are some who go way beyond.
Most people don't turn of FSAA.
In other words, the first and second mipmap levels are never accessed. It's a waste of memory.
Most people don't turn of FSAA.
In other words, the first and second mipmap levels are never accessed. It's a waste of memory.
Author
Do I really need optimizing something that is of version, lets say 0.13??
And it is not meant to be a retail game, but a little framework for testing effects, so only people with recent GPUs are the target audience. There is no way I can use more that 256 MB of video RAM here, so who cares whether I use 30MB or 220MB? :)
Personally I don't like seeing separte pixels when doing close ups. If anyone has any idea how to avoid this without using high-resolution textures then fire away.
__ODIN__: What exactly scares you? Have you ever worked on seams in a 3d package? I don't think so. You seem to have no idea what does the whole process of cutting both geometry and textures involve.
And it is not meant to be a retail game, but a little framework for testing effects, so only people with recent GPUs are the target audience. There is no way I can use more that 256 MB of video RAM here, so who cares whether I use 30MB or 220MB? :)
Personally I don't like seeing separte pixels when doing close ups. If anyone has any idea how to avoid this without using high-resolution textures then fire away.
__ODIN__: What exactly scares you? Have you ever worked on seams in a 3d package? I don't think so. You seem to have no idea what does the whole process of cutting both geometry and textures involve.
Quote:Original post by therealremi.
__ODIN__: What exactly scares you? Have you ever worked on seams in a 3d package? I don't think so. You seem to have no idea what does the whole process of cutting both geometry and textures involve.
Sure; I'm not an artist. But you want a job as a technical artist (not a modeller or animator); as such your key jobs will be more related to dealing with exporters, tools, pipelines, engine limitations, etc.
My personal issue was that you felt that your comfort-zone in using large single textures as opposed to breaking the batching was more important than getting it running on a wider range of hardware. To me that's a bit like someone applying for a handphone coding job and saying he doesn't really want to care about memory or porting or boring stuff like that. Your mileage may wary, though.
One possible simple hack is just to do a caps check at load-time and downscale the textures if there's no cap bit for 4096x4096 textures. It'll give you some pixelation, but at least you have a fallback path.
Anyways; it's a very nice looking demo, and technically very impressive for someone who's primary interest is in art, not in code. Good luck!
Allan
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement