Sign in to follow this  

OpenGL Rendermonkey preview-win totally blank!

Recommended Posts

My setup: Notebook Amilo XA2528 with win vista Geforce 8600M GS, 256 mbyte After having programmed my opengl 2dengine for a long time, I felt it was time to dig into gpu programming to get better performance and for some nice effects! I found out about Rendermonkey and tried it out just to test some features and so on. I loaded up some examples and they compiled just fine with no errors, but then - they all turn up blank! The preview-window shows nothing, it's just totally black. I can turn on the boundingbox and triad and stuff, but there is no content. I have not tested all examples, but I have tested most of them, and only the FUR demo I can get to work... somehow? I don't think it looks right. It seems like some functions is missing from it, as there is no smoothness to it. look: I fired up glew, and it tells me that OpenGL version 2.1.1 is supported and the shader stuff looks fine. Any ideas? =(

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know. Perhaps there is something wrong with the OpenGL ES backend of RenderMonkey.
Did you try the examples in GL2 folder?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know what it's supposed to look like, but that screenshot of a fur shader looks vaguely right. Its based on shells and the more shells you have the smoother it will be, add more shell layers and it will look smoother.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sry for digging out this old thread, but today I encountered a similar problem when I tried RenderMonkey's OGLES 2.0 shader examples and also found a workaround for this issue in the web.

I wrote a little C++ program and OpenGL ES 2.0 with some simple shaders and everything works fine (using GLES emulator), the very primitive shader runs perfectly.
As the next step I wanted to do some shader prototyping using RenderMonkey but I had always a blank preview window for the OGLES 2.0 examples - the DirectX HLSL and 'Desktop'-OpenGL examples worked very nicely instead.

This issue may occur when using newer NVidia graphic cards / drivers - I tested and confirmed this issue with a GTX285 and a GT220. As a workaround one may use the NVidia's [b]NVEmulate[/b] tool to set the GLSL compiler device support to NV40.

The tool should be available at [url=""][/url].

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
    • Total Posts
  • Similar Content

    • By DelicateTreeFrog
      Hello! As an exercise for delving into modern OpenGL, I'm creating a simple .obj renderer. I want to support things like varying degrees of specularity, geometry opacity, things like that, on a per-material basis. Different materials can also have different textures. Basic .obj necessities. I've done this in old school OpenGL, but modern OpenGL has its own thing going on, and I'd like to conform as closely to the standards as possible so as to keep the program running correctly, and I'm hoping to avoid picking up bad habits this early on.
      Reading around on the OpenGL Wiki, one tip in particular really stands out to me on this page:
      For something like a renderer for .obj files, this sort of thing seems almost ideal, but according to the wiki, it's a bad idea. Interesting to note!
      So, here's what the plan is so far as far as loading goes:
      Set up a type for materials so that materials can be created and destroyed. They will contain things like diffuse color, diffuse texture, geometry opacity, and so on, for each material in the .mtl file. Since .obj files are conveniently split up by material, I can load different groups of vertices/normals/UVs and triangles into different blocks of data for different models. When it comes to the rendering, I get a bit lost. I can either:
      Between drawing triangle groups, call glUseProgram to use a different shader for that particular geometry (so a unique shader just for the material that is shared by this triangle group). or
      Between drawing triangle groups, call glUniform a few times to adjust different parameters within the "master shader", such as specularity, diffuse color, and geometry opacity. In both cases, I still have to call glBindTexture between drawing triangle groups in order to bind the diffuse texture used by the material, so there doesn't seem to be a way around having the CPU do *something* during the rendering process instead of letting the GPU do everything all at once.
      The second option here seems less cluttered, however. There are less shaders to keep up with while one "master shader" handles it all. I don't have to duplicate any code or compile multiple shaders. Arguably, I could always have the shader program for each material be embedded in the material itself, and be auto-generated upon loading the material from the .mtl file. But this still leads to constantly calling glUseProgram, much more than is probably necessary in order to properly render the .obj. There seem to be a number of differing opinions on if it's okay to use hundreds of shaders or if it's best to just use tens of shaders.
      So, ultimately, what is the "right" way to do this? Does using a "master shader" (or a few variants of one) bog down the system compared to using hundreds of shader programs each dedicated to their own corresponding materials? Keeping in mind that the "master shaders" would have to track these additional uniforms and potentially have numerous branches of ifs, it may be possible that the ifs will lead to additional and unnecessary processing. But would that more expensive than constantly calling glUseProgram to switch shaders, or storing the shaders to begin with?
      With all these angles to consider, it's difficult to come to a conclusion. Both possible methods work, and both seem rather convenient for their own reasons, but which is the most performant? Please help this beginner/dummy understand. Thank you!
    • By JJCDeveloper
      I want to make professional java 3d game with server program and database,packet handling for multiplayer and client-server communicating,maps rendering,models,and stuffs Which aspect of java can I learn and where can I learn java Lwjgl OpenGL rendering Like minecraft and world of tanks
    • By AyeRonTarpas
      A friend of mine and I are making a 2D game engine as a learning experience and to hopefully build upon the experience in the long run.

      -What I'm using:
          C++;. Since im learning this language while in college and its one of the popular language to make games with why not.     Visual Studios; Im using a windows so yea.     SDL or GLFW; was thinking about SDL since i do some research on it where it is catching my interest but i hear SDL is a huge package compared to GLFW, so i may do GLFW to start with as learning since i may get overwhelmed with SDL.  
      Knowing what we want in the engine what should our main focus be in terms of learning. File managements, with headers, functions ect. How can i properly manage files with out confusing myself and my friend when sharing code. Alternative to Visual studios: My friend has a mac and cant properly use Vis studios, is there another alternative to it?  
    • By ferreiradaselva
      Both functions are available since 3.0, and I'm currently using `glMapBuffer()`, which works fine.
      But, I was wondering if anyone has experienced advantage in using `glMapBufferRange()`, which allows to specify the range of the mapped buffer. Could this be only a safety measure or does it improve performance?
      Note: I'm not asking about glBufferSubData()/glBufferData. Those two are irrelevant in this case.
    • By xhcao
      Before using void glBindImageTexture(    GLuint unit, GLuint texture, GLint level, GLboolean layered, GLint layer, GLenum access, GLenum format), does need to make sure that texture is completeness. 
  • Popular Now