Jump to content
  • Advertisement

Recommended Posts

I have just noticed that, in quake 3 and half - life, dynamic models are effected from light map. For example in dark areas, gun that player holds seems darker. How did they achieve this effect ? I can use image based lighting techniques however (Like placing an environment probe and using it for reflections and ambient lighting), this tech wasn't used in games back then, so there must be a simpler method to do this.

Here is a link that shows how modern engines does it. Indirect Lighting Cache It would be nice if you know a paper that explains this technique. Can I apply this to quake 3' s light map generator and bsp format ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement

Quake 3 used a light grid, it's a 3D grid of precomputed lights that it creates during map compile time, then find the closest N lights for the dynamic models that it is rendering.  It then just uses simple vertex lighting from that set of lights for that model.  This is just for dynamic models though, the scene itself is all precomputed lightmaps (though they are toggled/adjusted to achieve more dynamic effects, like a rockets light trail).  The Quake 3 code is readily available online, you can look it over yourself to get an idea of how they did it/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And also I think the bot/opponents are being shadowed in the darker areas of the map, although it's harder to tell because they move around very quickly, and also the dynamic lights are lighting them up when they fire their gun at you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of games from that era would trace a single ray downwards to find the floor under the player's feet, then find the lightmap-UV coordinates at that point, then sample the lightmap at those coordinates and use it as a constant ambient value for the player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15.07.2017 at 4:39 PM, Hodgman said:

Lots of games from that era would trace a single ray downwards to find the floor under the player's feet, then find the lightmap-UV coordinates at that point, then sample the lightmap at those coordinates and use it as a constant ambient value for the player.

Increasing sample count and applying attenuation based on distance may produce a good result. I'll definitely give this a shot.

One of my question remained unanswered. How modern engines does this ? Is there a paper, tutorial or a chapter from a book that explains ue4's light cache or Unitiy's light probe ? Before implementing anything I like to know about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, afraidofdark said:

One of my question remained unanswered. How modern engines does this ? Is there a paper, tutorial or a chapter from a book that explains ue4's light cache or Unitiy's light probe ? Before implementing anything I like to know about this.

Here are some options how to store directional ambient light, any of them can be called 'probe':

 

One color for each side of a cube, so 6 directions and you interpolate the 3 values fitting a given normal. (Known as Valves ambient cube used in HL2)

Spherical Harmonics. The number of bands you use define the detail, 2 or 3 bands (12 / 27 floats) is enough for ambient diffuse.

Cube maps. Enough details for reflections (used a lot for IBL / PBR today). Lowest LOD == ambient cube.

Dual paraboloid maps (or two sphere maps). Same as cube maps, but needs only 2 textures instead 6.

 

Independent of the data format you choose there remains the question how to apply it to a given sample position. some options:

 

Bounding volume set manually by artist, e.g. a sphere or box with a soft border: You find all affecting volumes per sample and accumulate their contribution.

Uniform grid / multiresolution grids: You interpolate the 8 closest probes. E.g. UE4 light cache.

Voroni Tetrahedronilaztion: You interpolate closest 4 probes (similar to interpolating 3 triangle vertices by barycentric coords for the 2D case). AFAIK Unity uses this.

 

Also the automatic methods often require manual tuning, e.g. a cut off plane to prevent light leaks through a wall to a neighbouring room.

Notice a directionless ambient light used in Quake does not support bump mapping. The 'get ambient from floor' trick works well only for objects near the ground.

There are probably hundrets of papers talking about details.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/16/2017 at 8:00 PM, afraidofdark said:

Increasing sample count and applying attenuation based on distance may produce a good result. I'll definitely give this a shot.

One of my question remained unanswered. How modern engines does this ? Is there a paper, tutorial or a chapter from a book that explains ue4's light cache or Unitiy's light probe ? Before implementing anything I like to know about this.

The "get ambient from floor" only applies to Quake 2 (and possibly Quake 1). Quake 3 uses a 3D grid, each cell contained 3 values: Direction, Ambient light color, and Direct light color. This data is filled during lightmap baking.

The grid is bound to the levels bounding box and divided by some value (default is xyz: 64,64,128). That is, each cell ranges 64 units in XY and 128 on Z (which is up in Quake).

 

Modern games do largely the same thing, however they store the results in different forms (spherical harmonics, whatever else). JoeJ covers this in the post above.

For ambient diffuse, a variation of the things JoeJ can be seen in modern engines, each with their own tradeoffs. For ambient reflections, cubemaps are used, often times hand-placed.

Edited by Styves

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

  • Advertisement
  • Advertisement
  • Popular Tags

  • Popular Now

  • Advertisement
  • Similar Content

    • By Gnollrunner
      Hi again,  After some looking around I have decided to base my game directly on Direct X rather than using an existing game engine.  Because of the nature of the stuff I'm doing it just didn't seem to fit very well and I kept running into road blocks.  At this point I have a big blob of code for doing fractal world generation and some collision code,  and I'm trying to put it into some form that resembles a game engine.  Since I've never used one before It's a bit alien to me ..... so can someone direct me to a book, website, article, whatever... that covers this?  I'm mainly looking for stuff that covers C++ library design. I'm not adverse to using 3rd party tools for stuff I can used them for.
    • By mmmax3d
      Hi everyone,
      I would need some assistance from anyone who has a similar experience
      or a nice idea!
      I have created a skybox (as cube) and now I need to add a floor/ground.
      The skybox is created from cubemap and initially it was infinite.
      Now it is finite with a specific size. The floor is a quad in the middle
      of the skybox, like a horizon.
      I have two problems:
      When moving the skybox upwards or downwards, I need to
      sample from points even above the horizon while sampling
      from the botton at the same time.  I am trying to create a seamless blending of the texture
      at the points of the horizon, when the quad is connected
      to the skybox. However, I get skew effects. Does anybody has done sth similar?
      Is there any good practice?
      Thanks everyone!
    • By mmmax3d
      Hi everyone,
      I would need some assistance from anyone who has a similar experience
      or a nice idea!
      I have created a skybox (as cube) and now I need to add a floor/ground.
      The skybox is created from cubemap and initially it was infinite.
      Now it is finite with a specific size. The floor is a quad in the middle
      of the skybox, like a horizon.
      I have two problems:
      When moving the skybox upwards or downwards, I need to
      sample from points even above the horizon while sampling
      from the botton at the same time.  I am trying to create a seamless blending of the texture
      at the points of the horizon, when the quad is connected
      to the skybox. However, I get skew effects. Does anybody has done sth similar?
      Is there any good practice?
      Thanks everyone!
    • By iArtist93
      I'm trying to implement PBR into my simple OpenGL renderer and trying to use multiple lighting passes, I'm using one pass per light for rendering as follow:
      1- First pass = depth
      2- Second pass = ambient
      3- [3 .. n] for all the lights in the scene.
      I'm using the blending function glBlendFunc(GL_ONE, GL_ONE) for passes [3..n], and i'm doing a Gamma Correction at the end of each fragment shader.
      But i still have a problem with the output image it just looks noisy specially when i'm using texture maps.
      Is there anything wrong with those steps or is there any improvement to this process?
    • 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.
  • 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!