# OpenGL Dynamic Ambient Occlusion

## Recommended Posts

Hey,

So I'm trying to deepen my GPU knowledge and embarking on rendering a minecraft-style mesh with Dynamic Ambient Occlusion ala this GPU Gems article.

I guess the principle question I have is this:

When you are creating the AO shadow value per-vertex (element) in your mesh, do you then just follow that with a normal render and use normal fragment shader linear interpolation between adjacent vertex shadow values to actually shade the fragments?

i.e. does the process look something like this:

2 passes of the AO algorithm

1 pass of a normal render using a texture map output by the AO algroithm to get shadow values per vertex?

Or am I missing something in the article and you can actually do the screen render within the 2 AO passes?

Thanks!

##### Share on other sites

I can help you with this, but.. Please don't. Despite being fully aware of the limitations of SSAO, I actually implemented various SSAO variations.

They all had one thing in common: You can't find edges that aren't there, nor can you know one mesh REALLY isn't creating AO with another. It's going to be awful.

On models you usually bake in some fake AO to make them more detailed. On dynamic stuff, including just basic movement, it won't work well.

You have a wonderful opportunity to use your vertex attributes for something useful. Set aside a few 6-8 bytes for lighting.

You can use 4 channels for emissive light, 1 channel for shadows, 1 for AO (it being separated allows you to ramp it), and even brightness (from torches).

If you don't have anything so fancy, just set aside 2 channels: shadows and AO.

Using the classic blanket approach to shadows is going to end up with your caves being in half-shade just like the rest of your shadows. Not to mention, shadows are affected by atmospheric light as well. Easily accounted for in voxel worlds simply by finding the "ground level" in a post-process stage of your terrain.

See:

http://0fps.net/2013/07/03/ambient-occlusion-for-minecraft-like-worlds/

And why not SSAO:

http://backslashn.com/post/37712343299/this-is-not-how-ambient-occlusion-works

Edited by Kaptein

##### Share on other sites

So is that article I posted actually SSAO though as opposed to an approximation of true AO? I thought it was the latter, not the former. My understanding is that a lot of SSAO implementations use the depth buffer hack for faster rendering but then you get jenky outcomes. The GPU Gems article, I think, is approximating global AO. Ya? Or am I just wrong on terminology?

Anyway, the AO for minecraft-like worlds is pretty great.

Just from a theoretical learning perspective though if you have the answer to my original question can you provide it?

Thanks :)

##### Share on other sites

You are correct. It is an interesting technique. I don't think it will work too well without some serious work in a minecraftian-style world. Too much stuff.

Definitely interesting though. Some things to consider: You need access to the atmosphere, as well as any nearby lights. You need to be able to efficiently represent vertices are disk-shapes, and I think that means you can't have quads with only 4 vertices.

No idea how well this is going to work out - how scalable it is. But it looks fancy.

Edited by Kaptein

##### Share on other sites

ok. so rambling on-wards. My central hangups are still just about implementation. I'm somewhat worried about performance but it's way easier to deal with that after implementation rather than obsessing about it now. Mostly I just want to learn this stuff; secondarily it's a bonus if it looks amazing and runs at framerate...

So here's my thoughts about implementation. Is anything in here either insane or just stupid because I don't know about some awesome GPU trick?

Basically, I think I can generate better results by generating AO data using the actual voxel cube faces, instead of their verts due to the fact that they are cubes and not a smoother mesh. Maybe this is wrong... Feedback appreciated :)

GPU 1 (generate our disks with which we will perform the AO algorithm described in the Gems 2 chapter)
at the center of each face of each block that is facing air
generate one point
generate the appropriate normal
transform feedback -> retrieve the list of points/normals
fragment shader: discard unless there is a way to just get the pipeline to stop after Transform Feedback?

CPU 1 (build the disk lookup data structure)
extracted points/normals go into textures
build out the hierarchical representation data structure within the textures

GPU 2 (First AO pass. Basically, render a single quad with UVs [0..1] to cover the whole data texture)
run AO pass #1 and store accumulated shadow data into a new texture

CPU 2 (here just to pass the texture back to the GPU for the second AO pass)
extract shadow info texture from GPU 2
Is there is a way to run the second GPU pass without coming back out to the CPU? If the texture is already bound from the previous render, I guess it's still in the same place?

GPU 3 (Second AO pass)
render a single quad with UVs [0..1] to cover the whole data texture.
run AO pass #2 and store accumulated shadow data into a shadow info texture

GPU 4 (render the actual scene)
for each cell center
generate the 2 triangles to render
because we generated AO data for faces, not verts, blend between up to nearest 4 face values as calculated in GPU 2+3

## Create an account

Register a new account

• ### Forum Statistics

• Total Topics
627757
• Total Posts
2978950
• ### Similar Content

• 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!

• 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

• 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.
-Questions
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?

• 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.

• 11
• 10
• 10
• 23
• 14