Sign in to follow this  
ballmar

DX11 Bitmap font engine problem

Recommended Posts

Hello.

 

I'm trying to create my own text-rendering engine based on Rastertek's tutorial. The steps I did to make it work:

 

1. Created my own .png file, containing common ASCII symbols divided by spaces. PNG file had not been compressed.

2. Successfully parsed PNG file so that each symbol has it's own texture coordinates and width/height in pixels. The height is the same for each letter and equals to texture height.

3. Created DDS file from PNG font file.

4. Loaded texture from DDS file.

5. Created squares for each letter according to their width/height in pixels and texture coordinates.

6. Created orthogonal projection matrix to project them on the screen within pixel shader without any changes.

 

Everything seems well, but the result looks bad:

[attachment=13749:game.png]

 

As you can see, the letters look dirty and unprecise. Thats how DDS file looks in DX texture tool for comparison:

[attachment=13750:font_dds.png]

Edited by GuardianX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for response. I use this sampler state:

 

    D3D11_SAMPLER_DESC samplerDesc;
    samplerDesc.Filter = D3D11_FILTER_MIN_MAG_MIP_LINEAR;
    samplerDesc.AddressU = D3D11_TEXTURE_ADDRESS_WRAP;
    samplerDesc.AddressV = D3D11_TEXTURE_ADDRESS_WRAP;
    samplerDesc.AddressW = D3D11_TEXTURE_ADDRESS_WRAP;
    samplerDesc.MipLODBias = 0.0f;
    samplerDesc.MaxAnisotropy = 1;
    samplerDesc.ComparisonFunc = D3D11_COMPARISON_ALWAYS;
    samplerDesc.BorderColor[0] = 0;
    samplerDesc.BorderColor[1] = 0;
    samplerDesc.BorderColor[2] = 0;
    samplerDesc.BorderColor[3] = 0;
    samplerDesc.MinLOD = 0;
    samplerDesc.MaxLOD = D3D11_FLOAT32_MAX;

    mpDevice->CreateSamplerState(&samplerDesc, &mpSamplerState);
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity, why don't you use the sprite fonts that are part of XNA. 

 

Anyways, I took a look at more detail.  I thought it might have been a slightly reduced image, but the final image and the original font both show the Capital 'M' at 10 pixels tall.

 

However, this looks like compression artifacts.  I.e. when it was saved, it may have included a small decompression like PNG/JPG would use.  Or it could be from the loading process.  I haven't used DX font loading of any type, so I'm not sure exactly how it should work, but that really looks like compression artifacts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you sure of your texture coordinate and your vertex coordinates ? I had a similar issue with OpenGl, and I had to correct the texture coordinates. It was years ago though, so I cannot be more accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for response, guys.

 

Out of curiosity, why don't you use the sprite fonts that are part of XNA. 

 

Anyways, I took a look at more detail.  I thought it might have been a slightly reduced image, but the final image and the original font both show the Capital 'M' at 10 pixels tall.

 

However, this looks like compression artifacts.  I.e. when it was saved, it may have included a small decompression like PNG/JPG would use.  Or it could be from the loading process.  I haven't used DX font loading of any type, so I'm not sure exactly how it should work, but that really looks like compression artifacts.

 

I'm creating my own C++ rendering engine for the sake of learning DX11. Not sure if XNA sprite fonts can be used in such application.

 

I don't think it is caused by image compressing in my case, since DDS file, generated from image (which I receive uncompressed) looks precise and has no artefacts. However, It is possible that this behavior is caused by loading mechanism. In my engine, I use DDS loader, provided by new Microsoft D3D11 tutorials. I'll create plane with size of the font texture and check if this behavior keeps bubbling up even for sole plane mesh, thanks for pointing that out.

 

 

 

Are you sure of your texture coordinate and your vertex coordinates ? I had a similar issue with OpenGl, and I had to correct the texture coordinates. It was years ago though, so I cannot be more accurate.

 

Well, I'm absolutely sure about generated vertex coordinates and that I load and set correct texture coordinates from font description file, generated by one of my tools. At first glance, texture coordinates and width of every character, obtained from this tool are legit. The whole mechanism of generating data from PNG file in this tool is just about getting start pixel and end pixel of each symbol and dividing those values by width of the file, so it's pretty clear and simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you paste your two images on top of each other and align the letters it's clearly visible that the rendered characters are wider than those in the texture. Perhaps you scale horizontally somewhere. Also, if you manually specify the back-buffer size, double-check that it matches the window client area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you have startPixel/width and endPixel/width OR startPixel/width and (endPixel + 1)/width ?

 

If you paste your two images on top of each other and align the letters it's clearly visible that the rendered characters are wider than those in the texture. Perhaps you scale horizontally somewhere. Also, if you manually specify the back-buffer size, double-check that it matches the window client area.

 

Yeah, I just checked font description generation program and it seems that it was (endPixel+1)/width that caused result letters look wider. Anyway, I fixed it, and result text still looks bad:

 

[attachment=13758:update.png]

 

Back-buffer's size is okay. By the way, letters on this new screen are 32 pixels tall, so pay no attention to that.

Edited by GuardianX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity, why don't you use the sprite fonts that are part of XNA. 

 

OOPS, a title near this one when I posted had said something about XNA and I confused it slightly with this one, presuming XNA, which as I recall allows the use of DX components.  

 

I'm creating my own C++ rendering engine for the sake of learning DX11. Not sure if XNA sprite fonts can be used in such application.

Yeah, same issue as prior, and I don't think XNA fonts would be usable in DX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For your uv's, can you try x / (width-1), (x+w)/(width-1), y / (height-1), (y+h)/(height-1)?

If you're using endpixel, try endpixel-1 / (with-1)

?

 

and try with with no filtering in the sampler too.

*edit, erm, the other types of filtering i mean.

Edited by rukiruki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know you are trying to do this as a learning exercise, but have you tried just using the PNG version of the texture instead of the DDS?  It would be worth a shot to see if you can get rid of the compression artifacts as a possible source of error.

 

If you want to see another reference, MJP added his text renderer to Hieroglyph 3.  Take a look in the SpriteRendererDX11 class, and you will see how he is using GDI to build the glyph texture.  I recall having issues if the source texture was not anti-aliased, and if the origin texture size is slightly off from the end size in the render target.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On your new picture the letter widths are still different from the texture. If you are using point sampling, try switching to linear filtering and you will see it more clearly that the texture is blurred. Disable blending or add character boxes to your texture in different colors, so you can see each quad matches the corresponding quad in the texture pixel by pixel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for response, guys.

 

For your uv's, can you try x / (width-1), (x+w)/(width-1), y / (height-1), (y+h)/(height-1)?

If you're using endpixel, try endpixel-1 / (with-1)

?

 

and try with with no filtering in the sampler too.

*edit, erm, the other types of filtering i mean.

 

Well yes, that's what I have done in my font description creator tool. Now, the start texture coordinate is calculated as startPixel/(width-1) and end texture coordinate as endPixel/(width-1). The height is the same for all font letters, since they are placed in single line inside texture. Tried other types of filtering too, but unfortunately with no results.

 

I know you are trying to do this as a learning exercise, but have you tried just using the PNG version of the texture instead of the DDS?  It would be worth a shot to see if you can get rid of the compression artifacts as a possible source of error.

 

If you want to see another reference, MJP added his text renderer to Hieroglyph 3.  Take a look in the SpriteRendererDX11 class, and you will see how he is using GDI to build the glyph texture.  I recall having issues if the source texture was not anti-aliased, and if the origin texture size is slightly off from the end size in the render target.

 

Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with texture loading from file types other than DDS yet. I use Microsoft DDS loader from their tutorials, since I'm writing code using Windows 8 SDK, where lots of D3DX loading functions have been cut off. However, I created a single plane with the size of DDS texture, covering it with that texture, and here is the result:

 

[attachment=13778:discrete_letters_comparing_to_single_solid_textured_plane.png]

 

Upper text is generated by number of planes and fractional texture coordinates. The text in the center of the image is a solid rectangle with single font texture over it. As you can see, latter is displayed fine, so I assume there is no distortion, caused by texture convertion mechanism.

 

Concerning GDI. Thank you for pointing that out for me, but I hope to use the same text class I'm creating right now in 3D world as well. As far as I understand, GDI is used for 2D text rendering on the window surface (standard Win32 graphics API). The code of Hieroglyph 3 is extremely well written, but it's a little overwhelming project for me as beginner =) That's why I'm trying to create very simple font rendering engine the same way as described in Rastertek tutorial.

 

On your new picture the letter widths are still different from the texture. If you are using point sampling, try switching to linear filtering and you will see it more clearly that the texture is blurred. Disable blending or add character boxes to your texture in different colors, so you can see each quad matches the corresponding quad in the texture pixel by pixel.

 

I'm using linear filtering, tho I played with other filters and ever tried to disable Z-buffer, but those actions provided no result. Here is comparison with and without alpha, to emphasize pixel occupation by letter-planes. Pay no attention to spaces between letters, because they are auto-generated and do not belong to either letter geometry:

 

[attachment=13779:comparing_1.png][attachment=13780:comparing_2.png]

 

If that helps, my font texture is 1900x18 pixels:

[attachment=13781:font_black.png]

Not sure why, but it seems that forum engine compressed it, so it's just an example.

 

And generated coordinates are the following (the line consists of letter, width-in-pixels, height-in-pixels, start texture U coordinate, end texture U coordinate):

 

: 3 18 0.003159558 0.004212744
, 3 18 0.01421801 0.0152712
. 3 18 0.02632965 0.02738283
! 3 18 0.03791469 0.03896788
@ 7 18 0.04844655 0.05160611
# 8 18 0.059505 0.06319115
~ 8 18 0.07109005 0.07477619
% 7 18 0.08320168 0.08636124
$ 7 18 0.09478673 0.09794629
( 3 18 0.1079516 0.1090047
) 3 18 0.1184834 0.1195366
- 8 18 0.1290153 0.1327014
+ 9 18 0.1406003 0.1448131
= 9 18 0.1521854 0.1563981
/ 7 18 0.1637704 0.16693
* 7 18 0.175882 0.1790416
? 7 18 0.1874671 0.1906267
< 9 18 0.1985255 0.2027383
> 9 18 0.2101106 0.2143233
\ 7 18 0.2216956 0.2248552
A 11 18 0.2327541 0.23802
B 8 18 0.2448657 0.2485519
C 9 18 0.2564508 0.2606635
D 9 18 0.2680358 0.2722486
E 8 18 0.2796209 0.283307
F 8 18 0.2912059 0.294892
G 9 18 0.3027909 0.3070037
H 9 18 0.314376 0.3185887
I 7 18 0.3264876 0.3296472
J 9 18 0.3375461 0.3417588
K 9 18 0.3491311 0.3533439
L 9 18 0.3607162 0.3649289
M 11 18 0.3717746 0.3770405
N 9 18 0.3838862 0.388099
O 9 18 0.3954713 0.399684
P 8 18 0.4075829 0.4112691
Q 9 18 0.4186414 0.4228541
R 9 18 0.4302264 0.4344392
S 7 18 0.4423381 0.4454976
T 9 18 0.4533965 0.4576093
U 9 18 0.4649816 0.4691943
V 10 18 0.47604 0.4807793
W 11 18 0.4876251 0.492891
X 10 18 0.4992101 0.5039495
Y 9 18 0.5113217 0.5155345
Z 7 18 0.5234334 0.526593
a 8 18 0.5350184 0.5387046
b 9 18 0.5460769 0.5502896
c 8 18 0.557662 0.5613481
d 9 18 0.5692469 0.5734597
e 8 18 0.580832 0.5845182
f 8 18 0.5929437 0.5966298
g 8 18 0.6040021 0.6076882
h 9 18 0.6155872 0.6197999
i 7 18 0.6276988 0.6308584
j 5 18 0.6392838 0.6413902
k 8 18 0.6508689 0.654555
l 7 18 0.6624539 0.6656135
m 11 18 0.6729858 0.6782517
n 9 18 0.6850974 0.6893101
o 8 18 0.6966825 0.7003686
p 9 18 0.7082675 0.7124802
q 9 18 0.7198526 0.7240653
r 8 18 0.7319642 0.7356504
s 7 18 0.7435492 0.7467088
t 8 18 0.7546077 0.7582939
u 9 18 0.7661927 0.7704055
v 10 18 0.7772512 0.7819905
w 11 18 0.7888362 0.7941021
x 9 18 0.8009478 0.8051606
y 11 18 0.8120063 0.8172722
z 7 18 0.8246446 0.8278041
0 7 18 0.8362296 0.8393891
1 7 18 0.8478146 0.8509742
2 8 18 0.8588731 0.8625593
3 7 18 0.8709847 0.8741443
4 7 18 0.8825698 0.8857293
5 7 18 0.8941548 0.8973144
6 8 18 0.9057398 0.909426
7 7 18 0.9173249 0.9204845
8 7 18 0.92891 0.9320695
9 7 18 0.940495 0.9436545 

 

I think it can be caused by floating point unpresice issues, but I'm not sure how to prove that and how to fix that, if it is the case. For example, consider letter Q (width 9 pixels) will have 0.4186414x1899=795.04320186 start pixel and 0.4228541x1899=802.9999359 end pixel, when DX tries to get texel for concrete pixel.

 

I don't multiply anything in my application, just wondering if DX could interpolate pixels wrong. Tho, there is the same issue with texture coordinates in Rastertek's tutorial, but result text looks just fine in it.

Edited by GuardianX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is either the texture coordinates or the vertex coordinates for your quads. Are you sure you are using only integer coordinates?

If your quad vertices are like 10.1 instead of 10.0 this could happen. If your texture-coordinates are on exact pixel boundaries in the texture then you need to use vertex coordinates without fractional parts too.

Also, you should not use 1899, but 1900. Coordinate 1.0 would otherwise be on the left side of the last pixel, where it should be on the right side.

Floating point is not an issue, it is precise enough for this case.

 

So if Q starts at 177, 0 in the texture and is 9 pixels wide and 18 pixels high, use coords (177.0/1900.0, 0.0, (177.0+9.0)/1900.0, 1.0).

Use vertex-coordinates (x, y, (x + 9.0), (y + 18.0)) to draw it on the screen, where x and y is floor(...) to make sure they are integers.

 

If you later scale your text it's possible you want to include a half pixel border for linear filtering, and as such create texture coordinates at 10.5 / 1900 instead of 10.0 / 1900, at which point you also need to do that for vertex-coords on the screen. Start with integer coords.

Edited by Erik Rufelt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is either the texture coordinates or the vertex coordinates for your quads. Are you sure you are using only integer coordinates?

If your quad vertices are like 10.1 instead of 10.0 this could happen. If your texture-coordinates are on exact pixel boundaries in the texture then you need to use vertex coordinates without fractional parts too.

Also, you should not use 1899, but 1900. Coordinate 1.0 would otherwise be on the left side of the last pixel, where it should be on the right side.

Floating point is not an issue, it is precise enough for this case.

 

So if Q starts at 177, 0 in the texture and is 9 pixels wide and 18 pixels high, use coords (177.0/1900.0, 0.0, (177.0+9.0)/1900.0, 1.0).

Use vertex-coordinates (x, y, (x + 9.0), (y + 18.0)) to draw it on the screen, where x and y is floor(...) to make sure they are integers.

 

If you later scale your text it's possible you want to include a half pixel border for linear filtering, and as such create texture coordinates at 10.5 / 1900 instead of 10.0 / 1900, at which point you also need to do that for vertex-coords on the screen. Start with integer coords.

Thanks for response.

 

Coordinates of my quads are float values, but they don't have any fractional parts, I just checked that. For example, when I create a sentence, containing only Q letter, the quad, which I get is:

 

Coordinate 0: 0    -18    0     Texture: 0.418641    1 // bottom-left
Coordinate 1: 9    -18    0     Texture: 0.422854    1 // bottom-right
Coordinate 2: 0    -0    0     Texture: 0.418641    0 // top-left
Coordinate 3: 9    -0    0     Texture: 0.422854    0 // top-right
 

 

As you can see for yourself from my previos post, they are accurately formed out of font description file.

 

Those coordinates are then modified in vertex shader by world matrix, which just offsets them to appropriate x,y coordinate system where 0,0 lies on top left of the screen. Without multiplication by world matrix, the quad will be displayed nearly at the center of the screen, but letter will look the same as with world transformation anyway, so this transformation have no impact on letter's bad appearance.

 

Also, doesnt last column of pixels will have an index 1899, if the first column has 0? In that case the last column of pixels will have 1899/1900 texture U coordinate. Shouldn't it be equal to 1?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you post the formula you're using to calculate UV?
 

For example, consider letter Q (width 9 pixels) will have 0.4186414x1899=795.04320186 start pixel and 0.4228541x1899=802.9999359 end pixel, when DX tries to get texel for concrete pixel.

 

803 - 795 is not 9 pixels wide

Here's mine i use to achieve pixel perfect precision

float cRenderBuffer::convertUVDX( int pixelValIn )
{
	// Return
	return (float)( pixelValIn ) / (float)( currentTexture->baseDimension - 1 ); 
}

so 795 should equate to 0.4186413902053712 and 804 should equate to 0.4233807266982622

What you posted seems to be placing a 8 pixel wide uv onto a 9 pixel wide quad, unless I misread!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you post the formula you're using to calculate UV?
 

For example, consider letter Q (width 9 pixels) will have 0.4186414x1899=795.04320186 start pixel and 0.4228541x1899=802.9999359 end pixel, when DX tries to get texel for concrete pixel.

 

803 - 795 is not 9 pixels wide

Here's mine i use to achieve pixel perfect precision

float cRenderBuffer::convertUVDX( int pixelValIn )
{
	// Return
	return (float)( pixelValIn ) / (float)( currentTexture->baseDimension - 1 ); 
}

so 795 should equate to 0.4186413902053712 and 804 should equate to 0.4233807266982622

What you posted seems to be placing a 8 pixel wide uv onto a 9 pixel wide quad, unless I misread!

 

Well, 795 is the start pixel position and 803 is the end pixel horizontal position of `Q` symbol. That means both should be included when calculating symbol's width. Hence result width is 803 - 795 + 1 = 9. My old algorythm was the same as yours.

 

Anyway, it looks like I have fixed an issue now. I imagined texture as the grid of texels, where each pixel resides between grid-forming lines, and not on them, that's why it cannot have pixelPos/width-1 texture coordinate, since `pixelPos` itself is 1.0/width-1 wide! It means that to obtain texture coordinate (nearest grid-forming line), I have to decrease symbol's start pixel horizontal position by 0.5 and increase symbol's last pixel horizontal position by 0.5. Here is algorythm I use to analyse PNG font texture written in C#:

 

Bitmap data = new Bitmap(filename);
int width = data.Width;
int height = data.Height;


int letter_start = -1;
int letter_end = -1;
int current_letter = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < width; i++)
{
    bool is_empty_column = true;
    for (int j = 0; j < height; j++)
    {
        if (data.GetPixel(i, j).A != 0)
        {
            is_empty_column = false;
            if (letter_start == -1)
            {
                letter_start = i;
            }
        }
    }
    if (is_empty_column == true)
    {
        if (letter_start != -1)
        {
            letter_end = i - 1;
            mapped_alphabet[alphabet[current_letter]] = new LetterInfo(letter_start, 
                letter_end, letter_end - letter_start + 1, height, ((float)letter_start - 0.5f)/((float)width-1.0f), 
                ((float)letter_end + 0.5f)/((float)width-1.0f));


            letter_start = -1;
            current_letter += 1;
        }
    }
}

 

where alphabet = ":,.!@#~%$()-+=/*?<>\\ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789"

 

And the result is:

 

[attachment=13783:result.png]

 

There are rare occasions of half-transparent symbols, such as `9`, but everything else looks good.

 

Thanks to everyone who had found the time to help! =)

Edited by GuardianX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad you got it working!

I'm confused as to why you're using  "letter_end - letter_start + 1" and "803 - 795 + 1 = 9", the +1 seems to be wrong to me.

If start pixel is 795 and width is 9, you should be passing 795 and 795 + 9 (which is 804) into the UV equation.

u1 = 795 / 1899

u2 = 804 / 1899

 

And hopefully you then dont have to bother with the 0.5 texel offsets, and it should be pixel perfect

 

But your way may be fine anyway, it's just the way I've gotten used to. Good luck :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I accidentaly found a perfect article, describing the process I tried to explain in my previous post biggrin.png

Hope it will help someone who stuck at this problem just like me.

 

It describes how you must subtract 0.5 to get corresponding pixel and texel match each other.

 

I'm glad you got it working!

I'm confused as to why you're using  "letter_end - letter_start + 1" and "803 - 795 + 1 = 9", the +1 seems to be wrong to me.

If start pixel is 795 and width is 9, you should be passing 795 and 795 + 9 (which is 804) into the UV equation.

u1 = 795 / 1899

u2 = 804 / 1899

 

And hopefully you then dont have to bother with the 0.5 texel offsets, and it should be pixel perfect

 

But your way may be fine anyway, it's just the way I've gotten used to. Good luck smile.png

 

Take a look at this:

 

[attachment=13784:example.png]

 

It illustrates my approach more closely.

 

Thank you for advice, regardless! =)

Edited by GuardianX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I accidentaly found a perfect article, describing the process I tried to explain in my previous post biggrin.png

Hope it will help someone who stuck at this problem just like me.

 

It describes how you must subtract 0.5 to get corresponding pixel and texel match each other.

 

That is not correct in D3D11, only in D3D9. It has changed. If that fixes your problem then it is coincidental and not your actual issue, as you see from the letters that still look wrong.

 

You should divide by 1900 to get correct coordinates if that is the size of the texture, not 1899. The last pixel begins at 1899, but ends at 1900.

Imagine a texture that is just 1x1 or 2x2 in size. If you divide by width-1 you get completely wrong results.

 

If your Q begins at 795 and is 9 pixels wide then the correct coords are:

795.0 / 1900.0 = 0.4184210526

(795.0 + 9.0) / 1900.0 = 0.4231578947

 

If you have a 1x1 sized letter at the last pixel on the right side of the texture, then it starts at 1899 and has a width of 1.

1899.0 / 1900.0 = 0.9994736842

(1899.0 + 1) / 1900.0 = 1.0

 

Each single pixel is a quad with 4 edges, it is not a zero-width point. Each single pixel has a width of 1.0 / 1900.0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I accidentaly found a perfect article, describing the process I tried to explain in my previous post biggrin.png

Hope it will help someone who stuck at this problem just like me.

 

It describes how you must subtract 0.5 to get corresponding pixel and texel match each other.

 

That is not correct in D3D11, only in D3D9. It has changed. If that fixes your problem then it is coincidental and not your actual issue, as you see from the letters that still look wrong.

 

You should divide by 1900 to get correct coordinates if that is the size of the texture, not 1899. The last pixel begins at 1899, but ends at 1900.

Imagine a texture that is just 1x1 or 2x2 in size. If you divide by width-1 you get completely wrong results.

 

If your Q begins at 795 and is 9 pixels wide then the correct coords are:

795.0 / 1900.0 = 0.4184210526

(795.0 + 9.0) / 1900.0 = 0.4231578947

 

If you have a 1x1 sized letter at the last pixel on the right side of the texture, then it starts at 1899 and has a width of 1.

1899.0 / 1900.0 = 0.9994736842

(1899.0 + 1) / 1900.0 = 1.0

 

Each single pixel is a quad with 4 edges, it is not a zero-width point. Each single pixel has a width of 1.0 / 1900.0

 

Oh, thanks for clearing that up for me. Now I have everything working as intended! =)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Concerning GDI. Thank you for pointing that out for me, but I hope to use the same text class I'm creating right now in 3D world as well. As far as I understand, GDI is used for 2D text rendering on the window surface (standard Win32 graphics API). The code of Hieroglyph 3 is extremely well written, but it's a little overwhelming project for me as beginner =) That's why I'm trying to create very simple font rendering engine the same way as described in Rastertek tutorial.

Thanks for the compliment :)  I know you already solved the problem, but just for clarification about this point: GDI is indeed a 2D text rendering technology.  However, Hieroglyph uses GDI to generate the 2D texture, similar to what you are doing manually.  This generated texture (I guess it would be called a glyph texture) can then be used in 2D rendering like what you are doing now, or in 3D as well.  Both methods are currently supported in Hieroglyph via the SpriteRendererDX11 (for 2D) and TextActor (for 3D).

 

If you ever have any questions about Hieroglyph, please feel free to shoot me an IM and I would be happy to help.

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  

  • Announcements

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      628326
    • Total Posts
      2982086
  • Similar Content

    • By GalacticCrew
      In some situations, my game starts to "lag" on older computers. I wanted to search for bottlenecks and optimize my game by searching for flaws in the shaders and the layer between CPU and GPU. My first step was to measure the time my render function needs to solve its tasks. Every second I wrote the accumulated times of each task into my console window. Each second it takes around
      170ms to call render functions for all models (including settings shader resources, updating constant buffers, drawing all indexed and non-indexed vertices, etc.) 40ms to render the UI 790ms to call SwapChain.Present <1ms to do the rest (updating structures, etc.) In my Swap Chain description I set a frame rate of 60 Hz, if its supported by the computer. It made sense for me that the Present function waits some time until it starts the next frame. However, I wanted to check, if this might be a problem for me. After a web search I found articles like this one, which states 
      My drivers are up-to-date so that's no issue. I installed Microsoft's PIX, but I was unable to use it. I could configure my game for x64, but PIX is not able to process DirectX 11.. After getting only error messages, I installed NVIDIA's NSight. After adjusting my game and installing all components, I couldn't get a proper result, but my game freezes after a new frames. I haven't figured out why. There is no exception, error message and other debug mechanisms like log messages and break points tell me the game freezes at the end of the render function after a few frames. So, I looked for another profiling tool and found Jeremy's GPUProfiler. However, the information returned by this tool are too basic to get an in-depth knowledge about my performance issues.
      Can anyone recommend a GPU Profiler or any other tool that might help me to find bottlenecks in my game and or that is able to indicate performance problems in my shaders? My custom graphics engine can handle subjects like multi-texturing, instancing, soft shadowing, animation, etc. However, I am pretty sure, there are things I can optimize!
      I am using SharpDX to develop a game (engine) based on DirectX 11 with .NET Framework 4.5. My graphics cards is from NVIDIA and my processor is made by Intel.
    • By GreenGodDiary
      SOLVED: I had written 
      Dispatch(32, 24, 0) instead of
      Dispatch(32, 24, 1)  
       
      I'm attempting to implement some basic post-processing in my "engine" and the HLSL part of the Compute Shader and such I think I've understood, however I'm at a loss at how to actually get/use it's output for rendering to the screen.
      Assume I'm doing something to a UAV in my CS:
      RWTexture2D<float4> InputOutputMap : register(u0); I want that texture to essentially "be" the backbuffer.
       
      I'm pretty certain I'm doing something wrong when I create the views (what I think I'm doing is having the backbuffer be bound as render target aswell as UAV and then using it in my CS):
       
      DXGI_SWAP_CHAIN_DESC scd; ZeroMemory(&scd, sizeof(DXGI_SWAP_CHAIN_DESC)); scd.BufferCount = 1; scd.BufferDesc.Format = DXGI_FORMAT_R8G8B8A8_UNORM; scd.BufferUsage = DXGI_USAGE_RENDER_TARGET_OUTPUT | DXGI_USAGE_SHADER_INPUT | DXGI_USAGE_UNORDERED_ACCESS; scd.OutputWindow = wndHandle; scd.SampleDesc.Count = 1; scd.Windowed = TRUE; HRESULT hr = D3D11CreateDeviceAndSwapChain(NULL, D3D_DRIVER_TYPE_HARDWARE, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, D3D11_SDK_VERSION, &scd, &gSwapChain, &gDevice, NULL, &gDeviceContext); // get the address of the back buffer ID3D11Texture2D* pBackBuffer = nullptr; gSwapChain->GetBuffer(0, __uuidof(ID3D11Texture2D), (LPVOID*)&pBackBuffer); // use the back buffer address to create the render target gDevice->CreateRenderTargetView(pBackBuffer, NULL, &gBackbufferRTV); // set the render target as the back buffer CreateDepthStencilBuffer(); gDeviceContext->OMSetRenderTargets(1, &gBackbufferRTV, depthStencilView); //UAV for compute shader D3D11_UNORDERED_ACCESS_VIEW_DESC uavd; ZeroMemory(&uavd, sizeof(uavd)); uavd.Format = DXGI_FORMAT_R8G8B8A8_UNORM; uavd.ViewDimension = D3D11_UAV_DIMENSION_TEXTURE2D; uavd.Texture2D.MipSlice = 1; gDevice->CreateUnorderedAccessView(pBackBuffer, &uavd, &gUAV); pBackBuffer->Release();  
      After I render the scene, I dispatch like this:
      gDeviceContext->OMSetRenderTargets(0, NULL, NULL); m_vShaders["cs1"]->Bind(); gDeviceContext->CSSetUnorderedAccessViews(0, 1, &gUAV, 0); gDeviceContext->Dispatch(32, 24, 0); //hard coded ID3D11UnorderedAccessView* nullview = { nullptr }; gDeviceContext->CSSetUnorderedAccessViews(0, 1, &nullview, 0); gDeviceContext->OMSetRenderTargets(1, &gBackbufferRTV, depthStencilView); gSwapChain->Present(0, 0); Worth noting is the scene is rendered as usual, but I dont get any results from the CS (simple gaussian blur)
      I'm sure it's something fairly basic I'm doing wrong, perhaps my understanding of render targets / views / what have you is just completely wrong and my approach just makes no sense.

      If someone with more experience could point me in the right direction I would really appreciate it!

      On a side note, I'd really like to learn more about this kind of stuff. I can really see the potential of the CS aswell as rendering to textures and using them for whatever in the engine so I would love it if you know some good resources I can read about this!

      Thank you <3
       
      P.S I excluded the .hlsl since I cant imagine that being the issue, but if you think you need it to help me just ask

      P:P:S. As you can see this is my first post however I do have another account, but I can't log in with it because gamedev.net just keeps asking me to accept terms and then logs me out when I do over and over
    • By mister345
      Does buffer number matter in ID3D11DeviceContext::PSSetConstantBuffers()? I added 5 or six constant buffers to my framework, and later realized I had set the buffer number parameter to either 0 or 1 in all of them - but they still all worked! Curious why that is, and should they be set up to correspond to the number of constant buffers?
      Similarly, inside the buffer structs used to pass info into the hlsl shader, I added padding inside the c++ struct to make a struct containing a float3 be 16 bytes, but in the declaration of the same struct inside the hlsl shader file, it was missing the padding value - and it still worked! Do they need to be consistent or not? Thanks.
          struct CameraBufferType
          {
              XMFLOAT3 cameraPosition;
              float padding;
          };
    • By noodleBowl
      I was wondering if anyone could explain the depth buffer and the depth stencil state comparison function to me as I'm a little confused
      So I have set up a depth stencil state where the DepthFunc is set to D3D11_COMPARISON_LESS, but what am I actually comparing here? What is actually written to the buffer, the pixel that should show up in the front?
      I have these 2 quad faces, a Red Face and a Blue Face. The Blue Face is further away from the Viewer with a Z index value of -100.0f. Where the Red Face is close to the Viewer with a Z index value of 0.0f.
      When DepthFunc is set to D3D11_COMPARISON_LESS the Red Face shows up in front of the Blue Face like it should based on the Z index values. BUT if I change the DepthFunc to D3D11_COMPARISON_LESS_EQUAL the Blue Face shows in front of the Red Face. Which does not make sense to me, I would think that when the function is set to D3D11_COMPARISON_LESS_EQUAL the Red Face would still show up in front of the Blue Face as the Z index for the Red Face is still closer to the viewer
      Am I thinking of this comparison function all wrong?
      Vertex data just in case
      //Vertex date that make up the 2 faces Vertex verts[] = { //Red face Vertex(Vector4(0.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f), Color(1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f)), Vertex(Vector4(100.0f, 100.0f, 0.0f), Color(1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f)), Vertex(Vector4(100.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f), Color(1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f)), Vertex(Vector4(0.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f), Color(1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f)), Vertex(Vector4(0.0f, 100.0f, 0.0f), Color(1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f)), Vertex(Vector4(100.0f, 100.0f, 0.0f), Color(1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f)), //Blue face Vertex(Vector4(0.0f, 0.0f, -100.0f), Color(0.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f)), Vertex(Vector4(100.0f, 100.0f, -100.0f), Color(0.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f)), Vertex(Vector4(100.0f, 0.0f, -100.0f), Color(0.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f)), Vertex(Vector4(0.0f, 0.0f, -100.0f), Color(0.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f)), Vertex(Vector4(0.0f, 100.0f, -100.0f), Color(0.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f)), Vertex(Vector4(100.0f, 100.0f, -100.0f), Color(0.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f)), };  
    • By mellinoe
      Hi all,
      First time poster here, although I've been reading posts here for quite a while. This place has been invaluable for learning graphics programming -- thanks for a great resource!
      Right now, I'm working on a graphics abstraction layer for .NET which supports D3D11, Vulkan, and OpenGL at the moment. I have implemented most of my planned features already, and things are working well. Some remaining features that I am planning are Compute Shaders, and some flavor of read-write shader resources. At the moment, my shaders can just get simple read-only access to a uniform (or constant) buffer, a texture, or a sampler. Unfortunately, I'm having a tough time grasping the distinctions between all of the different kinds of read-write resources that are available. In D3D alone, there seem to be 5 or 6 different kinds of resources with similar but different characteristics. On top of that, I get the impression that some of them are more or less "obsoleted" by the newer kinds, and don't have much of a place in modern code. There seem to be a few pivots:
      The data source/destination (buffer or texture) Read-write or read-only Structured or unstructured (?) Ordered vs unordered (?) These are just my observations based on a lot of MSDN and OpenGL doc reading. For my library, I'm not interested in exposing every possibility to the user -- just trying to find a good "middle-ground" that can be represented cleanly across API's which is good enough for common scenarios.
      Can anyone give a sort of "overview" of the different options, and perhaps compare/contrast the concepts between Direct3D, OpenGL, and Vulkan? I'd also be very interested in hearing how other folks have abstracted these concepts in their libraries.
  • Popular Now