Jump to content
  • Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  
Migi0027

DX11 DX11 - Terrain Tessellation repeating

This topic is 1740 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

Hi guys.

 

I've been trying to implement tessellation, and got it implemented, thanks to you.

 

My next goal is to implement terrain tessellation with displacement mapping

 

Questions: (Some I have attempted, shown in the shader code below)

  • The vertices generated on the cpu, do they just represent a plane, or a pre generated grid?
  • How do I decide the height of the displacement mapping, just a constant?
  • How are the normals generated?

My attempt: (If you want to see...)

cbuffer ConstantObjectBuffer : register (b0)
{
	matrix worldMatrix;
};

cbuffer ConstantFrameBuffer : register (b1)
{
	matrix viewMatrix;
	matrix projectionMatrix;

	float3 eyepos;
	float cppad;

	float4 lightvec;
	float4 lightcol;

	float FogStart;
	float FogEnd;
	float2 __space;

	float3 FogColor;
	float shadows;

	float SpecularIntensity;
	float3 pad3;
	float4 SpecularColor;
}


//***************************************************//
//                 VERTEX SHADER                     //
//***************************************************//

struct VOut
{
    float4 position : POSITION;
	float2 texcoord : TEXCOORD;
	float access : ACCESS;

	float tessAmount : TSSAM;
	
	float3 NormalW : NORMWORLD;
	float3 normal : NORM;
	float4 depthPosition : TEXTURE0;
};

struct GlobalIn
{
	float4 position : POSITION;
	float4 normal : NORMAL;
	float2 texcoord : TEXCOORD;
};

Texture2D t_map : register(t0);
SamplerState ss;

VOut VShader(GlobalIn input)
{
    VOut output;

    input.position.w = 1.0f;
	output.texcoord = input.texcoord;

	// Calculate the position of the vertex against the world, view, and projection matrices.
    /*output.position = mul(input.position, worldMatrix);
    output.position = mul(output.position, viewMatrix);
    output.position = mul(output.position, projectionMatrix);*/

	output.position = mul(input.position, viewMatrix);

	// Get Tesselation amount
	output.tessAmount = (1.0f / output.position.z) * 6.0f;

	output.position = input.position;

    output.NormalW = mul(float4(input.normal.xyz,0), mul(worldMatrix, viewMatrix));

	// Store the position value in a second input value for depth value calculations.
	output.depthPosition.xyz = mul(float4(input.position.xyz,1), mul(worldMatrix, viewMatrix)).xyz;

	// Per Vertex lighting
	float4 norm = normalize(input.normal);
	output.access = saturate(dot(norm, lightvec));

	output.normal = input.normal;
	
    return output;
}

//***************************************************//
//                 HULL SHADER                       //
//***************************************************//

struct HOutput
{
    float edges[3] : SV_TessFactor;
    float inside : SV_InsideTessFactor;
};

#define tessellationAmount 12.0f

HOutput ColorPatchConstantFunction(InputPatch<VOut, 3> inputPatch, uint patchId : SV_PrimitiveID)
{    
    HOutput output;

	float tA = inputPatch[0].tessAmount;
	tA = 12.0f;

    // Set the tessellation factors for the three edges of the triangle.
    output.edges[0] = tA;
    output.edges[1] = tA;
    output.edges[2] = tA;

    // Set the tessellation factor for tessallating inside the triangle.
    output.inside = tA;

    return output;
}

[domain("tri")]
[partitioning("integer")]
[outputtopology("triangle_cw")]
[outputcontrolpoints(3)]
[patchconstantfunc("ColorPatchConstantFunction")]

VOut HShader(InputPatch<VOut, 3> patch, uint pointId : SV_OutputControlPointID, uint patchId : SV_PrimitiveID)
{
    VOut output;

    // Set the x for this control point as the output x.
    output.position = patch[pointId].position;

    output.texcoord = patch[pointId].texcoord;
    output.access = patch[pointId].access;
    output.NormalW = patch[pointId].NormalW;
    output.normal = patch[pointId].normal;
    output.depthPosition = patch[pointId].depthPosition;

    return output;
}

//***************************************************//
//                 DOMAIN SHADER                     //
//***************************************************//

struct DOut
{
    float4 position : SV_Position;
	float2 texcoord : TEXCOORD;
	float access : ACCESS;
	
	float3 NormalW : NORMWORLD;
	float4 depthPosition : TEXTURE0;
};

[domain("tri")]

DOut DShader(HOutput input, float3 uvwCoord : SV_DomainLocation, const OutputPatch<VOut, 3> patch)
{
    DOut output;

	float3 vertexPosition;
    float2 texCoords;
    float3 normal;
    float4 worldPosition;

	vertexPosition = uvwCoord.x * patch[0].position + uvwCoord.y * patch[1].position + uvwCoord.z * patch[2].position;

    texCoords = uvwCoord.x * patch[0].texcoord + uvwCoord.y * patch[1].texcoord + uvwCoord.z * patch[2].texcoord;

    normal =  uvwCoord.x * float3(0, 1, 0) + uvwCoord.y * float3(0, 1, 0) + uvwCoord.z * float3(0, 1, 0);
    normal = normalize(normal);

    float vHeight = t_map.SampleLevel(ss, texCoords, 0);
    vertexPosition += float3(0, 1, 0) * (vHeight * 2.0f);

    output.position = mul(float4(vertexPosition, 1.0f), worldMatrix);
    output.position = mul(output.position, viewMatrix);
    output.position = mul(output.position, projectionMatrix);

    output.texcoord = texCoords;

    output.NormalW = mul(normal,(float3x3)worldMatrix);
    output.NormalW = normalize(output.NormalW);

    return output;
}

//***************************************************//
//                 PIXEL SHADER                      //
//***************************************************//

struct POut
{
	float4 Diffuse  : SV_Target0;
	float4 Depth    : SV_Target1;
	float4 Normals  : SV_Target2;
	float4 Lighting : SV_Target3;
};

POut PShader(VOut input)
{
	POut output;

	// Depth
	output.Depth = float4(input.depthPosition.xyz, 1.0f);

	// Normals
	output.Normals = float4(normalize(input.NormalW), 1);

	output.Diffuse = float4(1, 1, 1, 1);
	output.Lighting = float4(lightcol.rgb * input.access, 1.0f);

	output.Lighting = float4(1, 1, 1, 1);

	return output;
}

I've attempted with the pre generated grid, but this came: (The terrain is repeated over and over again, why?)

 

kcxu6f.png

 

Thank you, as always GameDev.

Edited by Migi0027

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement

Seems no one replied, so I'll try my best.

 

 

The vertices generated on the cpu, do they just represent a plane, or a pre generated grid?

Generate quad on CPU, tesellator stage will create extra triangles, which will result in your terrain.

 

 

How do I decide the height of the displacement mapping, just a constant?

If you're using UNORM or NORM texture, then you need to decide on min/max height. For example 1.0f in texture could mean 255.0f in world space.

If you're using FLOAT texture then just store height directly in the texture.

 

 

How are the normals generated?

It should be possible to calculate them based on data in displacement map, however I haven't done this, so I am unable to help more than this.

 

 

The terrain is repeated over and over again, why?

All your meshes have UV 0.0f to 1.0f, so every terrain ended up reading same texture coordinates.

You need to do do several Draw() calls and use different displacement map for each of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems no one replied, so I'll try my best.

 

 

The vertices generated on the cpu, do they just represent a plane, or a pre generated grid?

Generate quad on CPU, tesellator stage will create extra triangles, which will result in your terrain.

 

 

How do I decide the height of the displacement mapping, just a constant?

If you're using UNORM or NORM texture, then you need to decide on min/max height. For example 1.0f in texture could mean 255.0f in world space.

If you're using FLOAT texture then just store height directly in the texture.

 

 

How are the normals generated?

It should be possible to calculate them based on data in displacement map, however I haven't done this, so I am unable to help more than this.

 

 

The terrain is repeated over and over again, why?

All your meshes have UV 0.0f to 1.0f, so every terrain ended up reading same texture coordinates.

You need to do do several Draw() calls and use different displacement map for each of them.

This is most likely the issue.  However, you don't need separate draw calls if you just want to stretch that single displacement map across all of your tiles.  Then you would just use 1.0 / gridsX and 1.0 / gridsY sized pieces for each grid.  Does that make sense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, a bit closer.

 

Right now I send a quad to the gpu, and then tessellate/displace it from there, but another problem comes, it looks like only half on the quad is being rendered:

 

ao13cm.png

 

The shader practically hasn't changed, only the buffer creation:

Plane_VI plane;

// create the vertex buffer
D3D11_BUFFER_DESC bd;
ZeroMemory(&bd, sizeof(bd));

bd.Usage = D3D11_USAGE_DYNAMIC;
bd.ByteWidth = sizeof(MESH_STRUCT::Dummy) * 4;
bd.BindFlags = D3D11_BIND_VERTEX_BUFFER;
bd.CPUAccessFlags = D3D11_CPU_ACCESS_WRITE;
	
dev->CreateBuffer(&bd, NULL, &m_vertexBuffer);

D3D11_MAPPED_SUBRESOURCE ms;
// copy the vertices into the buffer
devcon->Map(m_vertexBuffer, NULL, D3D11_MAP_WRITE_DISCARD, NULL, &ms);    // map the buffer
memcpy(ms.pData, plane.Vertices, sizeof( plane.Vertices	));                 // copy the data
devcon->Unmap(m_vertexBuffer, NULL);

// create the index buffer
bd.Usage = D3D11_USAGE_DYNAMIC;
bd.ByteWidth = sizeof(DWORD) * 6;
bd.BindFlags = D3D11_BIND_INDEX_BUFFER;
bd.CPUAccessFlags = D3D11_CPU_ACCESS_WRITE;
bd.MiscFlags = 0;

dev->CreateBuffer(&bd, NULL, &m_indexBuffer);

devcon->Map(m_indexBuffer, NULL, D3D11_MAP_WRITE_DISCARD, NULL, &ms);    // map the buffer
memcpy(ms.pData, plane.Indices, sizeof(plane.Indices));                   // copy the data
devcon->Unmap(m_indexBuffer, NULL);

IndexCount = 6;
m_indexCount = 6;
m_vertexCount = 4;

Definition of Plane_VI:

----HEADER-----
class BASEAPI Plane_VI
{
public:MESH_STRUCT Vertices[4];
public:DWORD Indices[6];

public:
	Plane_VI();
};

----SOURCE-----
Plane_VI::Plane_VI()
{
	Vertices[0] = MESH_STRUCT(-1.0f, 0.0f, -1.0f, D3DXVECTOR3(0.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f), 0.0f, 1.0f, 0, 0, 0);
	Vertices[1] = MESH_STRUCT(1.0f, 0.0f, -1.0f, D3DXVECTOR3(0.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f), 1.0f, 1.0f, 0, 0, 0);
	Vertices[2] = MESH_STRUCT(-1.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f, D3DXVECTOR3(0.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f), 0.0f, 0.0f, 0, 0, 0);
	Vertices[3] = MESH_STRUCT(1.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f, D3DXVECTOR3(0.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f), 1.0f, 0.0f, 0, 0, 0);

	Indices[0] = 3;
	Indices[1] = 1;
	Indices[2] = 2;
	Indices[3] = 2;
	Indices[4] = 1;
	Indices[5] = 0;
};

The primitive topology I'm using (Could this be part of the problem?):

devcon->IASetPrimitiveTopology(D3D11_PRIMITIVE_TOPOLOGY_3_CONTROL_POINT_PATCHLIST); // devcon -> Device Context

Now what have I done wrong? happy.png  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I already suggested a pass-through geometry shader for inspecting values in PIX. If you can't use PIX or something, visualizing manually helps as an alternative. Currently I suspect something wrong with the tex-coords. Pass them along and output them in the pixel-shader as colors (return float4(texcoord.xy, 0, 1);). You should see some red-green-yellow color gradient.

Or bind the displacement map to your pixel shader instead and sample (and output) there, to see if the sampling is the culprit (solid instead of wireframe and without displacement).

Also, show your domain shader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PS. The domain shader is at the top of this page, in the shader file smile.png

 

Though I am going to do as suggested, I'm pretty sure that the UV's are fine, as I've used them before, but I might be wrong.

 

Something I forgot to add:

class BASEAPI MESH_STRUCT {
public: 
	FLOAT X, Y, Z; D3DXVECTOR3 Normal; FLOAT U, V; FLOAT tx; FLOAT ty; FLOAT tz; float accessability; D3DXVECTOR4 bWeight; // XYZ:Position, UV: Texture, txtytz: Tangent
//... Not nessesary
};

This should tell you the UV coords.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, tangents, accessability and weights ? Don't see them in your vertex shader input at all. Also: make sure your input layout is ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About that, some of the are used, some are not, but the input layout is correct, and in the correct order, but if you want to see:

 

D3D11_INPUT_ELEMENT_DESC ied[] =
{
{"POSITION", 0, DXGI_FORMAT_R32G32B32_FLOAT, 0, D3D11_APPEND_ALIGNED_ELEMENT, D3D11_INPUT_PER_VERTEX_DATA, 0},
{"NORMAL", 0, DXGI_FORMAT_R32G32B32_FLOAT, 0, D3D11_APPEND_ALIGNED_ELEMENT, D3D11_INPUT_PER_VERTEX_DATA, 0},
{"TEXCOORD", 0, DXGI_FORMAT_R32G32_FLOAT, 0, D3D11_APPEND_ALIGNED_ELEMENT, D3D11_INPUT_PER_VERTEX_DATA, 0},
};

if (dev->CreateInputLayout(ied, 3, VS->GetBufferPointer(), VS->GetBufferSize(), &pLayout) != S_OK)
...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, looks fine (though I for one wouldn't use a float4 for the normal in the shader). I assume the stride when binding the buffer is ok, too.

Try the other approaches.

You wouldn't mind posting that displacement texture, please ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure! wink.png

 

28lz05h.jpg

 

PS. I know, it's quite small, but it's fine for now.

Edited by Migi0027

Share this post


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

  • Advertisement
  • Advertisement
  • Popular Tags

  • Popular Now

  • Advertisement
  • Similar Content

    • By chiffre
      Introduction:
      In general my questions pertain to the differences between floating- and fixed-point data. Additionally I would like to understand when it can be advantageous to prefer fixed-point representation over floating-point representation in the context of vertex data and how the hardware deals with the different data-types. I believe I should be able to reduce the amount of data (bytes) necessary per vertex by choosing the most opportune representations for my vertex attributes. Thanks ahead of time if you, the reader, are considering the effort of reading this and helping me.
      I found an old topic that shows this is possible in principal, but I am not sure I understand what the pitfalls are when using fixed-point representation and whether there are any hardware-based performance advantages/disadvantages.
      (TLDR at bottom)
      The Actual Post:
      To my understanding HLSL/D3D11 offers not just the traditional floating point model in half-,single-, and double-precision, but also the fixed-point model in form of signed/unsigned normalized integers in 8-,10-,16-,24-, and 32-bit variants. Both models offer a finite sequence of "grid-points". The obvious difference between the two models is that the fixed-point model offers a constant spacing between values in the normalized range of [0,1] or [-1,1], while the floating point model allows for smaller "deltas" as you get closer to 0, and larger "deltas" the further you are away from 0.
      To add some context, let me define a struct as an example:
      struct VertexData { float[3] position; //3x32-bits float[2] texCoord; //2x32-bits float[3] normals; //3x32-bits } //Total of 32 bytes Every vertex gets a position, a coordinate on my texture, and a normal to do some light calculations. In this case we have 8x32=256bits per vertex. Since the texture coordinates lie in the interval [0,1] and the normal vector components are in the interval [-1,1] it would seem useful to use normalized representation as suggested in the topic linked at the top of the post. The texture coordinates might as well be represented in a fixed-point model, because it seems most useful to be able to sample the texture in a uniform manner, as the pixels don't get any "denser" as we get closer to 0. In other words the "delta" does not need to become any smaller as the texture coordinates approach (0,0). A similar argument can be made for the normal-vector, as a normal vector should be normalized anyway, and we want as many points as possible on the sphere around (0,0,0) with a radius of 1, and we don't care about precision around the origin. Even if we have large textures such as 4k by 4k (or the maximum allowed by D3D11, 16k by 16k) we only need as many grid-points on one axis, as there are pixels on one axis. An unsigned normalized 14 bit integer would be ideal, but because it is both unsupported and impractical, we will stick to an unsigned normalized 16 bit integer. The same type should take care of the normal vector coordinates, and might even be a bit overkill.
      struct VertexData { float[3] position; //3x32-bits uint16_t[2] texCoord; //2x16bits uint16_t[3] normals; //3x16bits } //Total of 22 bytes Seems like a good start, and we might even be able to take it further, but before we pursue that path, here is my first question: can the GPU even work with the data in this format, or is all I have accomplished minimizing CPU-side RAM usage? Does the GPU have to convert the texture coordinates back to a floating-point model when I hand them over to the sampler in my pixel shader? I have looked up the data types for HLSL and I am not sure I even comprehend how to declare the vertex input type in HLSL. Would the following work?
      struct VertexInputType { float3 pos; //this one is obvious unorm half2 tex; //half corresponds to a 16-bit float, so I assume this is wrong, but this the only 16-bit type I found on the linked MSDN site snorm half3 normal; //same as above } I assume this is possible somehow, as I have found input element formats such as: DXGI_FORMAT_R16G16B16A16_SNORM and DXGI_FORMAT_R16G16B16A16_UNORM (also available with a different number of components, as well as different component lengths). I might have to avoid 3-component vectors because there is no 3-component 16-bit input element format, but that is the least of my worries. The next question would be: what happens with my normals if I try to do lighting calculations with them in such a normalized-fixed-point format? Is there no issue as long as I take care not to mix floating- and fixed-point data? Or would that work as well? In general this gives rise to the question: how does the GPU handle fixed-point arithmetic? Is it the same as integer-arithmetic, and/or is it faster/slower than floating-point arithmetic?
      Assuming that we still have a valid and useful VertexData format, how far could I take this while remaining on the sensible side of what could be called optimization? Theoretically I could use the an input element format such as DXGI_FORMAT_R10G10B10A2_UNORM to pack my normal coordinates into a 10-bit fixed-point format, and my verticies (in object space) might even be representable in a 16-bit unsigned normalized fixed-point format. That way I could end up with something like the following struct:
      struct VertexData { uint16_t[3] pos; //3x16bits uint16_t[2] texCoord; //2x16bits uint32_t packedNormals; //10+10+10+2bits } //Total of 14 bytes Could I use a vertex structure like this without too much performance-loss on the GPU-side? If the GPU has to execute some sort of unpacking algorithm in the background I might as well let it be. In the end I have a functioning deferred renderer, but I would like to reduce the memory footprint of the huge amount of vertecies involved in rendering my landscape. 
      TLDR: I have a lot of vertices that I need to render and I want to reduce the RAM-usage without introducing crazy compression/decompression algorithms to the CPU or GPU. I am hoping to find a solution by involving fixed-point data-types, but I am not exactly sure how how that would work.
    • By cozzie
      Hi all,
      I was wondering it it matters in which order you draw 2D and 3D items, looking at the BeginDraw/EndDraw calls on a D2D rendertarget.
      The order in which you do the actual draw calls is clear, 3D first then 2D, means the 2D (DrawText in this case) is in front of the 3D scene.
      The question is mainly about when to call the BeginDraw and EndDraw.
      Note that I'm drawing D2D stuff through a DXGI surface linked to the 3D RT.
      Option 1:
      A - Begin frame, clear D3D RT
      B - Draw 3D
      C - BeginDraw D2D RT
      D - Draw 2D
      E - EndDraw D2D RT
      F - Present
      Option 2:
      A - Begin frame, clear D3D RT + BeginDraw D2D RT
      B - Draw 3D
      C - Draw 2D
      D - EndDraw D2D RT
      E- Present
      Would there be a difference (performance/issue?) in using option 2? (versus 1)
      Any input is appreciated.
    • By Sebastian Werema
      Do you know any papers that cover custom data structures like lists or binary trees implemented in hlsl without CUDA that work perfectly fine no matter how many threads try to use them at any given time?
    • By cozzie
      Hi all,
      Last week I noticed that when I run my test application(s) in Renderdoc, it crashes when it enable my code that uses D2D/DirectWrite. In Visual Studio no issues occur (debug or release), but when I run the same executable in Renderdoc, it crashes somehow (assert of D2D rendertarget or without any information). Before I spend hours on debugging/ figuring it out, does someone have experience with this symptom and/or know if Renderdoc has known issues with D2D? (if so, that would be bad news for debugging my application in the future );
      I can also post some more information on what happens, code and which code commented out, eliminates the problems (when running in RenderDoc).
      Any input is appreciated.
    • By lonewolff
      Hi Guys,
      I understand how to create input layouts etc... But I am wondering is it at all possible to derive an input layout from a shader and create the input layout directly from this? (Rather than manually specifying the input layout format?)
      Thanks in advance :)
       
  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

Participate in the game development conversation and more when you create an account on GameDev.net!

Sign me up!