# DX11 Depth buffer not working

## Recommended Posts

Hi Guys,

I am having trouble with my depth buffer in my project.

I am creating it as follows;

int Engine::DepthStencilCreate()
{
D3D11_TEXTURE2D_DESC descDepth;
descDepth.Width = nWidth;
descDepth.Height = nHeight;
descDepth.MipLevels = 1;
descDepth.ArraySize = 1;
descDepth.Format = DXGI_FORMAT_D24_UNORM_S8_UINT;
descDepth.SampleDesc.Count = nFsaa;
descDepth.SampleDesc.Quality = 0;
descDepth.Usage = D3D11_USAGE_DEFAULT;
descDepth.BindFlags = D3D11_BIND_DEPTH_STENCIL;
descDepth.CPUAccessFlags = 0;
descDepth.MiscFlags = 0;
if (d3dDevice->CreateTexture2D(&descDepth, NULL, &pDepthStencil))
{
MessageBox(NULL, "Failed to create depth buffer", "Error", NULL);
return 1;
}

D3D11_DEPTH_STENCIL_DESC dsDesc;
dsDesc.DepthEnable = true;
dsDesc.DepthFunc = D3D11_COMPARISON_LESS;

// Stencil test parameters
dsDesc.StencilEnable = true;

// Stencil operations if pixel is front-facing
dsDesc.FrontFace.StencilFailOp = D3D11_STENCIL_OP_KEEP;
dsDesc.FrontFace.StencilDepthFailOp = D3D11_STENCIL_OP_INCR;
dsDesc.FrontFace.StencilPassOp = D3D11_STENCIL_OP_KEEP;
dsDesc.FrontFace.StencilFunc = D3D11_COMPARISON_ALWAYS;

// Stencil operations if pixel is back-facing
dsDesc.BackFace.StencilFailOp = D3D11_STENCIL_OP_KEEP;
dsDesc.BackFace.StencilDepthFailOp = D3D11_STENCIL_OP_DECR;
dsDesc.BackFace.StencilPassOp = D3D11_STENCIL_OP_KEEP;
dsDesc.BackFace.StencilFunc = D3D11_COMPARISON_ALWAYS;

// Create depth stencil state
if(d3dDevice->CreateDepthStencilState(&dsDesc, &pDSState))
{
MessageBox(NULL, "Failed to create depth stencil state", "Error", NULL);
return 1;
}

// Bind depth stencil state
d3dContext->OMSetDepthStencilState(pDSState, 1);

D3D11_DEPTH_STENCIL_VIEW_DESC descDSV;
descDSV.Format = DXGI_FORMAT_D24_UNORM_S8_UINT;
descDSV.ViewDimension = D3D11_DSV_DIMENSION_TEXTURE2DMS;	//D3D11_DSV_DIMENSION_TEXTURE2D;
descDSV.Texture2D.MipSlice = 0;
descDSV.Flags = 0;

// Create the depth stencil view
//ID3D11DepthStencilView* pDSV;
if (d3dDevice->CreateDepthStencilView(pDepthStencil, &descDSV, &pDSV))
{
MessageBox(NULL, "Failed to create depth stencil view", "Error", NULL);
return 1;
}

// Bind the depth stencil view
d3dContext->OMSetRenderTargets(1,&d3dBackBuffer,pDSV);     // Depth stencil view for the render target

return 0;
}
The code runs perfectly without error and the DX11 debugger is not reporting any problems. I am also clearing it each frame.

Geometry is drawing over itself out of order as if the depth buffer is not turned on.

I can verify in the Graphical Debugger that the geometry is correct.

Any advice on why depth isn't working correctly would be greatly appreciated.

##### Share on other sites
At the moment I have to use the painters algorithm as depth isn't being adhered to.

##### Share on other sites
edit: ignore the following. Sanity has left the building.

logic coding error...see below

int Engine::DepthStencilCreate()
{
D3D11_TEXTURE2D_DESC descDepth;
descDepth.Width = nWidth;
descDepth.Height = nHeight;
descDepth.MipLevels = 1;
descDepth.ArraySize = 1;
descDepth.Format = DXGI_FORMAT_D24_UNORM_S8_UINT;
descDepth.SampleDesc.Count = nFsaa;  // << look into this (try setting count to 1)
descDepth.SampleDesc.Quality = 0;
descDepth.Usage = D3D11_USAGE_DEFAULT;
descDepth.BindFlags = D3D11_BIND_DEPTH_STENCIL;
descDepth.CPUAccessFlags = 0;
descDepth.MiscFlags = 0;

//
// you see you're failing creation here when you 'do not' get your message box
// if (!) then log fail

if (d3dDevice->CreateTexture2D(&descDepth, NULL, &pDepthStencil))
{
MessageBox(NULL, "Failed to create depth buffer", "Error", NULL);
return 1;
}

//
// the rest looks fine
D3D11_DEPTH_STENCIL_DESC dsDesc;
dsDesc.DepthEnable = true;
dsDesc.DepthFunc = D3D11_COMPARISON_LESS;

// Stencil test parameters
dsDesc.StencilEnable = true;

// Stencil operations if pixel is front-facing
dsDesc.FrontFace.StencilFailOp = D3D11_STENCIL_OP_KEEP;
dsDesc.FrontFace.StencilDepthFailOp = D3D11_STENCIL_OP_INCR;
dsDesc.FrontFace.StencilPassOp = D3D11_STENCIL_OP_KEEP;
dsDesc.FrontFace.StencilFunc = D3D11_COMPARISON_ALWAYS;

// Stencil operations if pixel is back-facing
dsDesc.BackFace.StencilFailOp = D3D11_STENCIL_OP_KEEP;
dsDesc.BackFace.StencilDepthFailOp = D3D11_STENCIL_OP_DECR;
dsDesc.BackFace.StencilPassOp = D3D11_STENCIL_OP_KEEP;
dsDesc.BackFace.StencilFunc = D3D11_COMPARISON_ALWAYS;

// Create depth stencil state
if(d3dDevice->CreateDepthStencilState(&dsDesc, &pDSState))
{
MessageBox(NULL, "Failed to create depth stencil state", "Error", NULL);
return 1;
}

// Bind depth stencil state
d3dContext->OMSetDepthStencilState(pDSState, 1);

D3D11_DEPTH_STENCIL_VIEW_DESC descDSV;
descDSV.Format = DXGI_FORMAT_D24_UNORM_S8_UINT;
descDSV.ViewDimension = D3D11_DSV_DIMENSION_TEXTURE2DMS;	//D3D11_DSV_DIMENSION_TEXTURE2D;
descDSV.Texture2D.MipSlice = 0;
descDSV.Flags = 0;

// Create the depth stencil view
//ID3D11DepthStencilView* pDSV;
if (d3dDevice->CreateDepthStencilView(pDepthStencil, &descDSV, &pDSV))
{
MessageBox(NULL, "Failed to create depth stencil view", "Error", NULL);
return 1;
}

// Bind the depth stencil view
d3dContext->OMSetRenderTargets(1,&d3dBackBuffer,pDSV);     // Depth stencil view for the render target

return 0;
}

##### Share on other sites

// you see you're failing creation here when you 'do not' get your message box // if (!) then log fail if (d3dDevice->CreateTexture2D(&descDepth, NULL, &pDepthStencil)) { MessageBox(NULL, "Failed to create depth buffer", "Error", NULL); return 1; }

The functions return zero on success, so the code is actually correct on that front.

I tried playing with the SampleDesc count, but changing that does result in an error as it needs to match the backbuffer SampleDesc count.

So, still no closer I'm afraid.

##### Share on other sites
Just worked out what was going on.

I had another call to OMSetRenderTargets() in my render target manager, but the last parameter was set to zero, causing the depth buffer to no longer be associated with the target.

##### Share on other sites
hmmm...that's a trip.
you're right. I don't like the way that looks, even though it's correct. Doesn't read well.

HRESULT test_okay = S_OK; // == 0L

if (test_okay)
MessageBox(0, L"not okay", L"fail", 0);
else
MessageBox(0, L"okay", L"good", 0); // <---- this path is traveled

Clearly I don't understand what I'm talking about.

+1 for getting it working.
Probably still should be using the FAILED or SUCCEEDED macro because we're looking for negative fail values,
and as you said, zero on success.

but if it's not broke... :) Edited by Goliath Forge

##### Share on other sites

hmmm...that's a trip.you're right. I don't like the way that looks, even though it's correct. Doesn't read well.

HRESULT test_okay = S_OK; // == 0L

if (test_okay)
MessageBox(0, L"not okay", L"fail", 0);
else
MessageBox(0, L"okay", L"good", 0); // <---- this path is traveled

Clearly I don't understand what I'm talking about.+1 for getting it working.Probably still should be using the FAILED or SUCCEEDED macro because we're looking for negative fail values,and as you said, zero on success.but if it's not broke... :)

Yeah, I see your point. I just looked up the macro and anything negative is a fail, so positive values will possibly give a false fail. Edited by DarkRonin

## Create an account

Register a new account

• ### Forum Statistics

• Total Topics
627737
• Total Posts
2978880
• ### Similar Content

• Hello,
I manged so far to implement NVIDIA's NDF-Filtering at a basic level (the paper can be found here). Here is my code so far:
//... // project the half vector on the normal (?) float3 hppWS = halfVector / dot(halfVector, geometricNormal) float2 hpp = float2(dot(hppWS, wTangent), dot(hppWS, wBitangent)); // compute the pixel footprint float2x2 dhduv = float2x2(ddx(hpp), ddy(hpp)); // compute the rectangular area of the pixel footprint float2 rectFp = min((abs(dhduv[0]) + abs(dhduv[1])) * 0.5, 0.3); // map the area to ggx roughness float2 covMx = rectFp * rectFp * 2; roughness = sqrt(roughness * roughness + covMx); //... Now I want combine this with LEAN mapping as state in Chapter 5.5 of the NDF paper.
But I struggle to understand what theses sections actually means in Code:
I suppose the first-order moments are the B coefficent of the LEAN map, however things like
float3 hppWS = halfVector / dot(halfVector, float3(lean_B, 0)); doesn't bring up anything usefull.
Next theres:
This simply means:
// M and B are the coefficents from the LEAN map float2x2 sigma_mat = float2x2( M.x - B.x * B.x, M.z - B.x * B.y, M.z - B.x * B.y, M.y - B.y * B.y); does it?
Finally:
This is the part confuses me the most: how am I suppose to convolute two matrices? I know the concept of convolution in terms of functions, not matrices. Should I multiple them? That didn't make any usefully output.
I hope someone can help with this maybe too specific question, I'm really despaired to make this work and i've spend too many hours of trial & error...
Cheers,
Julian
• By Baemz
Hello,
I've been working on some culling-techniques for a project. We've built our own engine so pretty much everything is built from scratch. I've set up a frustum with the following code, assuming that the FOV is 90 degrees.
float angle = CU::ToRadians(45.f); Plane<float> nearPlane(Vector3<float>(0, 0, aNear), Vector3<float>(0, 0, -1)); Plane<float> farPlane(Vector3<float>(0, 0, aFar), Vector3<float>(0, 0, 1)); Plane<float> right(Vector3<float>(0, 0, 0), Vector3<float>(angle, 0, -angle)); Plane<float> left(Vector3<float>(0, 0, 0), Vector3<float>(-angle, 0, -angle)); Plane<float> up(Vector3<float>(0, 0, 0), Vector3<float>(0, angle, -angle)); Plane<float> down(Vector3<float>(0, 0, 0), Vector3<float>(0, -angle, -angle)); myVolume.AddPlane(nearPlane); myVolume.AddPlane(farPlane); myVolume.AddPlane(right); myVolume.AddPlane(left); myVolume.AddPlane(up); myVolume.AddPlane(down); When checking the intersections I am using a BoundingSphere of my models, which is calculated by taking the average position of all vertices and then choosing the furthest distance to a vertex for radius. The actual intersection test looks like this, where the "myFrustum90" is the actual frustum described above.
The orientationInverse is the viewMatrix in this case.
bool CFrustum::Intersects(const SFrustumCollider& aCollider) { CU::Vector4<float> position = CU::Vector4<float>(aCollider.myCenter.x, aCollider.myCenter.y, aCollider.myCenter.z, 1.f) * myOrientationInverse; return myFrustum90.Inside({ position.x, position.y, position.z }, aCollider.myRadius); } The Inside() function looks like this.
template <typename T> bool PlaneVolume<T>::Inside(Vector3<T> aPosition, T aRadius) const { for (unsigned short i = 0; i < myPlaneList.size(); ++i) { if (myPlaneList[i].ClassifySpherePlane(aPosition, aRadius) > 0) { return false; } } return true; } And this is the ClassifySpherePlane() function. (The plane is defined as a Vector4 called myABCD, where ABC is the normal)
template <typename T> inline int Plane<T>::ClassifySpherePlane(Vector3<T> aSpherePosition, float aSphereRadius) const { float distance = (aSpherePosition.Dot(myNormal)) - myABCD.w; // completely on the front side if (distance >= aSphereRadius) { return 1; } // completely on the backside (aka "inside") if (distance <= -aSphereRadius) { return -1; } //sphere intersects the plane return 0; }
Please bare in mind that this code is not optimized nor well-written by any means. I am just looking to get it working.
The result of this culling is that the models seem to be culled a bit "too early", so that the culling is visible and the models pops away.
How do I get the culling to work properly?
I have tried different techniques but haven't gotten any of them to work.
If you need more code or explanations feel free to ask for it.

Thanks.

• hi,
i have read very much about the binding of a constantbuffer to a shader but something is still unclear to me.
e.g. when performing :   vertexshader.setConstantbuffer ( buffer,  slot )
is the buffer bound
or
b. to the VertexShader that is currently set as the active VertexShader
Is it possible to bind a constantBuffer to a VertexShader e.g. VS_A and keep this binding even after the active VertexShader has changed ?
I mean i want to bind constantbuffer_A  to VS_A, an Constantbuffer_B to VS_B  and  only use updateSubresource without using setConstantBuffer command every time.

Look at this example:
perform drawcall       ( buffer_A is used )

perform drawcall   ( buffer_B is used )
perform drawcall   (now which buffer is used ??? )

I ask this question because i have made a custom render engine an want to optimize to
the minimum  updateSubresource, and setConstantbuffer  calls

• I got a quick question about buffers when it comes to DirectX 11. If I bind a buffer using a command like:
IASetVertexBuffers IASetIndexBuffer VSSetConstantBuffers PSSetConstantBuffers  and then later on I update that bound buffer's data using commands like Map/Unmap or any of the other update commands.
Do I need to rebind the buffer again in order for my update to take effect? If I dont rebind is that really bad as in I get a performance hit? My thought process behind this is that if the buffer is already bound why do I need to rebind it? I'm using that same buffer it is just different data

• I am really stuck with something that should be very simple in DirectX 11.
1. I can draw lines using a PC (position, colored) vertices and a simple shader just fine.
2. I can draw 3D triangles using PCN (position, colored, normal) vertices just fine (even transparency and SpecularBlinnPhong shaders).

However, if I'm using my 3D shader, and I want to draw my PC lines in the same scene how can I do that?

If I change my lines to PCN and pass them to the 3D shader with my triangles, then the lighting screws them all up.  I only want the lighting for the 3D triangles, but no SpecularBlinnPhong/Lighting for the lines (just PC).
I am sure this is because if I change the lines to PNC there is not really a correct "normal" for the lines.
I assume I somehow need to draw the 3D triangles using one shader, and then "switch" to another shader and draw the lines?  But I have no clue how to use two different shaders in the same scene.  And then are the lines just drawn on top of the triangles, or vice versa (maybe draw order dependent)?
I must be missing something really basic, so if anyone can just point me in the right direction (or link to an example showing the implementation of multiple shaders) that would be REALLY appreciated.

I'm also more than happy to post my simple test code if that helps as well!