Sign in to follow this  
Plerion

OpenGL Using normals with voxels

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone,

 

I just set the prefix to OpenGL because thats in the end what my engine is based on. Tho the question is not related to OpenGL per se but of a general kind.

 

Currently i am rendering terrain using cubes. 'Calculating' the normals for the cube faces is fairly obvious but im running into some problems with the fact that a vertex basically has 3 normals. I am using a vertex buffer with the points of the cube and an index buffer which holds the indices for the faces. So a cube in the end consists of 8 vertices and up to 36 indices (depending on the neighbors). Now a vertex has 3 distinct normals and there should be no interpolation amongst the faces of the cube. Is there an elegant way to my normals working and avoiding to create 3 vertices for each point with lots of redundant data?

 

Thanks in advance for you help and a merry xmas

Plerion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can't avoid the "redundancy". For proper normals you need 24 distinct vertices (see here for something similar).
 
Some suggestions though:
- if bandwidth is a problem, you could use low-precision formats (normals and maybe even positions can be integers)
- how about creating the cube procedurally in the vertex shader ? (hmmm, probably only applicable with instancing...)

PS: Ah, ja, o schöni Wiehnachte smile.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, thank you for the hints. I have considered several options. First i was still trying to somehow get it done with 8 vertices and like a cube map for normals but in the end decided thats not even worth trying, as it hits performance way too bad and im not really in trouble with the current bandwidth. So rather ive tried to compress my data (3 floats position, 3 floats normals) and ended up with 2 bytes position and 1 byte normal. 1 byte of the position contains x and y as chunks have 16x16 rows so its upper 4 and lower 4 bits of the value. The second byte contains the z position as a row can be up to 256 blocks high. Finally the normal is compressed like this: 1 -> 1/0/0, -1 -> -1/0/0, 10 -> 0/1/0, -10 -> 0/-1/0, 100 -> 0/0/1, -100 -> 0/0/-1 and then reconstructed using the step function and division. So now i use less badnwidth and have correct normals and still have a byte left for occlusion values (as im using an Int4 vector).

 

PS: Merci, das wünsch ich diar doch au :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you only need flat shading, then you may actually get away with only eight vertices even if a cube with normals technically has 24 unique vertices. In flat shading, an attribute is automatically replicated over all vertices for a given primitive, and it is in fact possible to specify a cube with a vertex/normal array size of only eight entries. Look up the command glProvokingVertex which specifies which of the three vertices in a triangle, for example, that contains the flat-shaded attribute.

 

If you have for example a flat-shaded normal attribute in your vertex shader, and specify the last vertex as the provoking vertex, then the last vertex is the one containing the normal for all three vertices. The first two vertices effectively contains unused normal data and you should be able to take advantage of that to reduce the size of the vertex arrays.

//     7-----6
//    /|    /|
//   3-----2 |
//   | 4---|-5 
//   |/    |/
//   0-----1
 
    vector3 p[] = {
       { -1, -1, -1},
       {  1, -1, -1},
       {  1,  1, -1},
       { -1,  1, -1},
       { -1, -1,  1},
       {  1, -1,  1},
       {  1,  1,  1},
       { -1,  1,  1},
    };
 
    vector3 n[] = {
       {  0, -1,  0},
       {  1,  0,  0},
       {  0,  0, -1},
       { -1,  0,  0},
       {  0,  0,  0},
       {  0,  0,  0},
       {  0,  1,  0},
       {  0,  0,  1},
    };
 
    int index[] = {
        0,1,2,3,0,2,
        5,6,1,6,2,1,
        5,4,7,6,5,7,
        4,0,3,7,4,3,
        3,2,6,7,3,6,
        5,4,0,1,5,0,
    };

Try and see if this works, I don't have the possibility to try it myself at the moment. The index list is a list for 12 CCW-winded triangles building the cube in the comment at the top of the code.

 

If you only need to draw parts of the cube, you can truncate the index list accordingly.

Edited by Brother Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brother Bob's solution is pretty interesting, and probably better than what I'm about to propose, but I thought I'd add another option to the pot anyway.

You could construct the normal in the fragment shader using the derivative intrinsic. Basically: n = normalize(cross(dfdx(pos), dfdy(pos)));

Obvious drawback is that you must perform that calculation per fragment. But you don't even have to send any normal data down to the vertex shader!

Also, in a similar vein, you could compute the primitive normal in the geometry shader and spare yourself the per fragment computation, but it's not a given that that would be any faster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And yet another idea: Vertex Puller. One of the latest GPU Pro books has a chapter about this. In essence you don't bind your vertex (and index buffer) as such, but as readable buffers or textures. Then in the vertex shader you load/sample from them using the vertex ID. Manual input assembler, so to speak.

PS: This is just for fun (D3D11 vertex shader, use with Draw(36,0)) wink.png :

void ProceduralCubeVS(uint iid: SV_VertexID,
  out float3 position   : POSITION,
  out float2 tex        : TEXCOORD,
  out float3 normal     : NORMAL,    
  out float4 positionCS : SV_Position)
{
    uint face = iid / 6;
    uint index = iid % 6;
    float sign = face >= 3 ? 1 : -1;
    uint dir = face % 3;
    normal = float3(dir.xxx == uint3(0,1,2));
    float3 t = normal.yzx;
    float3 b = normal.zxy;

    const uint FSQIDS[] = {0,1,2,1,3,2};    
    uint id = FSQIDS[index];
    tex = float2(id & 1, (id >> 1) & 1);
    float2 fsq = float2(tex * float2(1,-1) + float2(-0.5,0.5));    
    normal *= sign;
    position = float3(fsq.x * t + sign * fsq.y * b + 0.5 * normal);

    positionCS = mul(float4(position,1), WorldViewProjection);
    position = mul(float4(position, 1), World).xyz;    
    normal = mul(normal, (float3x3)World).xyz;    
}

768b0a297248306.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@BrotherBob: Your suggestion is very interesting! I will surely try that as soon as i find time!

@Samith: I will try this as well and see what impact on performance it has and then see what balances out better, thanks for the tipp!

@unbird: Hehe, that looks interesting, but need to have a closer look at it first :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An important question: Is this really a problem?

 

You should wait with this optimization until you find out that it is really an issue. Then, depending on exactly what the issue is, you optimize.

 

It is not unusual that a change of algorithms can give much better pay-off. For example, improved culling or the use of LOD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have basiclly two solutions to this issue

 

1. send points to the geometry shader and use it to draw cubes, this should be good for when you have a lot of freemoving cubes or basically cube particles.

 

2. if the terrain is more or less static then assembling the vertecies, normals and texture coordinates manually into raw ttriangles and then pushing it into a VBO is the way to go, even with the simplest possible culling it's fast enough that you don't have to mess around with indices at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you only need flat shading, then you may actually get away with only eight vertices even if a cube with normals technically has 24 unique vertices. In flat shading, an attribute is automatically replicated over all vertices for a given primitive, and it is in fact possible to specify a cube with a vertex/normal array size of only eight entries. Look up the command glProvokingVertex which specifies which of the three vertices in a triangle, for example, that contains the flat-shaded attribute.
 
If you have for example a flat-shaded normal attribute in your vertex shader, and specify the last vertex as the provoking vertex, then the last vertex is the one containing the normal for all three vertices. The first two vertices effectively contains unused normal data and you should be able to take advantage of that to reduce the size of the vertex arrays.

//     7-----6
//    /|    /|
//   3-----2 |
//   | 4---|-5 
//   |/    |/
//   0-----1
 
    vector3 p[] = {
       { -1, -1, -1},
       {  1, -1, -1},
       {  1,  1, -1},
       { -1,  1, -1},
       { -1, -1,  1},
       {  1, -1,  1},
       {  1,  1,  1},
       { -1,  1,  1},
    };
 
    vector3 n[] = {
       {  0, -1,  0},
       {  1,  0,  0},
       {  0,  0, -1},
       { -1,  0,  0},
       {  0,  0,  0},
       {  0,  0,  0},
       {  0,  1,  0},
       {  0,  0,  1},
    };
 
    int index[] = {
        0,1,2,3,0,2,
        5,6,1,6,2,1,
        5,4,7,6,5,7,
        4,0,3,7,4,3,
        3,2,6,7,3,6,
        5,4,0,1,5,0,
    };
Try and see if this works, I don't have the possibility to try it myself at the moment. The index list is a list for 12 CCW-winded triangles building the cube in the comment at the top of the code.
 
If you only need to draw parts of the cube, you can truncate the index list accordingly.


I'd like to point out that this solution is very special to this case currently, if you start adding other attributes, such as texture coordinates. This solution begins to fall apart, and you are back to square one.

Although i will admit it's pretty creative, not something i would have thought of trying.

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
      628330
    • Total Posts
      2982112
  • Similar Content

    • By DejayHextrix
      Hi, New here. 
      I need some help. My fiance and I like to play this mobile game online that goes by real time. Her and I are always working but when we have free time we like to play this game. We don't always got time throughout the day to Queue Buildings, troops, Upgrades....etc.... 
      I was told to look into DLL Injection and OpenGL/DirectX Hooking. Is this true? Is this what I need to learn? 
      How do I read the Android files, or modify the files, or get the in-game tags/variables for the game I want? 
      Any assistance on this would be most appreciated. I been everywhere and seems no one knows or is to lazy to help me out. It would be nice to have assistance for once. I don't know what I need to learn. 
      So links of topics I need to learn within the comment section would be SOOOOO.....Helpful. Anything to just get me started. 
      Thanks, 
      Dejay Hextrix 
    • 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.
    • By aejt
      I recently started getting into graphics programming (2nd try, first try was many years ago) and I'm working on a 3d rendering engine which I hope to be able to make a 3D game with sooner or later. I have plenty of C++ experience, but not a lot when it comes to graphics, and while it's definitely going much better this time, I'm having trouble figuring out how assets are usually handled by engines.
      I'm not having trouble with handling the GPU resources, but more so with how the resources should be defined and used in the system (materials, models, etc).
      This is my plan now, I've implemented most of it except for the XML parts and factories and those are the ones I'm not sure of at all:
      I have these classes:
      For GPU resources:
      Geometry: holds and manages everything needed to render a geometry: VAO, VBO, EBO. Texture: holds and manages a texture which is loaded into the GPU. Shader: holds and manages a shader which is loaded into the GPU. For assets relying on GPU resources:
      Material: holds a shader resource, multiple texture resources, as well as uniform settings. Mesh: holds a geometry and a material. Model: holds multiple meshes, possibly in a tree structure to more easily support skinning later on? For handling GPU resources:
      ResourceCache<T>: T can be any resource loaded into the GPU. It owns these resources and only hands out handles to them on request (currently string identifiers are used when requesting handles, but all resources are stored in a vector and each handle only contains resource's index in that vector) Resource<T>: The handles given out from ResourceCache. The handles are reference counted and to get the underlying resource you simply deference like with pointers (*handle).  
      And my plan is to define everything into these XML documents to abstract away files:
      Resources.xml for ref-counted GPU resources (geometry, shaders, textures) Resources are assigned names/ids and resource files, and possibly some attributes (what vertex attributes does this geometry have? what vertex attributes does this shader expect? what uniforms does this shader use? and so on) Are reference counted using ResourceCache<T> Assets.xml for assets using the GPU resources (materials, meshes, models) Assets are not reference counted, but they hold handles to ref-counted resources. References the resources defined in Resources.xml by names/ids. The XMLs are loaded into some structure in memory which is then used for loading the resources/assets using factory classes:
      Factory classes for resources:
      For example, a texture factory could contain the texture definitions from the XML containing data about textures in the game, as well as a cache containing all loaded textures. This means it has mappings from each name/id to a file and when asked to load a texture with a name/id, it can look up its path and use a "BinaryLoader" to either load the file and create the resource directly, or asynchronously load the file's data into a queue which then can be read from later to create the resources synchronously in the GL context. These factories only return handles.
      Factory classes for assets:
      Much like for resources, these classes contain the definitions for the assets they can load. For example, with the definition the MaterialFactory will know which shader, textures and possibly uniform a certain material has, and with the help of TextureFactory and ShaderFactory, it can retrieve handles to the resources it needs (Shader + Textures), setup itself from XML data (uniform values), and return a created instance of requested material. These factories return actual instances, not handles (but the instances contain handles).
       
       
      Is this a good or commonly used approach? Is this going to bite me in the ass later on? Are there other more preferable approaches? Is this outside of the scope of a 3d renderer and should be on the engine side? I'd love to receive and kind of advice or suggestions!
      Thanks!
    • By nedondev
      I 'm learning how to create game by using opengl with c/c++ coding, so here is my fist game. In video description also have game contain in Dropbox. May be I will make it better in future.
      Thanks.
    • By Abecederia
      So I've recently started learning some GLSL and now I'm toying with a POM shader. I'm trying to optimize it and notice that it starts having issues at high texture sizes, especially with self-shadowing.
      Now I know POM is expensive either way, but would pulling the heightmap out of the normalmap alpha channel and in it's own 8bit texture make doing all those dozens of texture fetches more cheap? Or is everything in the cache aligned to 32bit anyway? I haven't implemented texture compression yet, I think that would help? But regardless, should there be a performance boost from decoupling the heightmap? I could also keep it in a lower resolution than the normalmap if that would improve performance.
      Any help is much appreciated, please keep in mind I'm somewhat of a newbie. Thanks!
  • Popular Now