• Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  

3D Transparent Shader problem

Recommended Posts

hi all
I'm having a problem with fragment shader
I don't want to render the parts that are in red in the image
I have to passes which culls clockwise and anticlockwise
and I'm getting the dot product of the normal with the camera position
if its less than 0 I set a transparent fragment
otherwise discard the fargment
here is the shader
 
Edited by AhmedSaleh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement

That trick to cull backfaces won't work in all cases with vertex normals because the interpolated normal isn't consistent with the planar geometry. I notice similar artifacts when using that trick for 2-sided lighting. You will need to use face normals, since these are consistent with the underlying geometry, or just tolerate the artifacts.

Edited by Aressera

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can get face normals using the derivatives of the interpolated surface position:

varying vec3 lerpPosition; // surface position, interpolated from vertex positions
void main(void)
{
	vec3 faceNormal = normalize( cross( dFdx( lerpPosition ), dFdy( lerpPosition ) ))
}

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have tried to use the face normal but the result is very bad all the faces are culled.

 

here is how i use it

#version 100
precision highp int;
precision highp float;


attribute vec4 vertex;
attribute vec3 normal;


uniform mat4 normalMatrix;
uniform mat4 modelViewProjectionMatrix;
uniform mat4 modelView;
uniform vec3 camera_world_position;
varying vec3 ec_pos;

varying vec3 camPos;
void main()
{        
    gl_Position = modelViewProjectionMatrix * vertex;
      vec3 norm = normal;
      //norm *=-1.0;
      ec_pos = vec3(gl_Position.x, gl_Position.y, gl_Position.z);
    camPos = camera_world_position;

    //lightDiffuse = dot(normalize(vec3(norm.x, norm.y, norm.z)), normalize(camera_world_position - vec3(gl_Position.x, gl_Position.y, gl_Position.z)));


     
 

#version 100
precision highp int;
precision highp float;

uniform float time;
uniform float touchX;
uniform float touchY;
uniform float touchZ;
uniform float line;

varying vec3 ec_pos;

varying vec3 camPos;


void main()
{
vec3 ec_normal = normalize(cross(dFdx(ec_pos), dFdy(ec_pos)));



float  lightDiffuse = dot( ec_normal, normalize(camPos));


    float rampLight =lightDiffuse;
    
    float light = (1.0 - rampLight) * 1.0;
    vec4 lightColor = vec4(1.0,1.0,1.0, 1.0);
    vec4 diffuseColor = lightColor * light;
       
    if(rampLight <0.0)
      {
        discard;
      }
    diffuseColor = smoothstep(vec4(0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0), vec4(0.7, 0.7, 0.7, 0.7), vec4(diffuseColor));
    gl_FragColor = diffuseColor;
     
}

    

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  

  • Advertisement
  • Advertisement
  • Popular Tags

  • Advertisement
  • Popular Now

  • Similar Content

    • By _RoboCat_
      Hi,
      Can anyone point me into good direction how to resolve this?
      I have flat mesh made from many quads (size 1x1 each) each split into 2 triangles. (made procedural)
      What i want to achieve is : "merge" small quads into bigger ones (show on picture 01), English is not my mother language and my search got no result... maybe i just form question wrong.
      i have array[][] where i store "map" information, for now i'm looking for blobs of same value in it -> and then for each position i create 1 quad. and on end create mesh from all.
      is there any good algorithm for creating mesh between random points on same plane? less triangles better. Or "de-tesselate" this to bigger/less triangles/quads?
      Also i would like to find "edges" and create "faces" between edge points (picture 02 shows what i want to achieve).
      No need for whole code, just if someone can point me in good direction would be nice.
      Thanks


    • By Karol Plewa
      Hi, 
       
      I am working on a project where I'm trying to use Forward Plus Rendering on point lights. I have a simple reflective scene with many point lights moving around it. I am using effects file (.fx) to keep my shaders in one place. I am having a problem with Compute Shader code. I cannot get it to work properly and calculate the tiles and lighting properly. 
       
      Is there anyone that is wishing to help me set up my compute shader?
      Thank you in advance for any replies and interest!
    • By PhillipHamlyn
      Hi
      I have a procedurally generated tiled landscape, and want to apply 'regional' information to the tiles at runtime; so Forests, Roads - pretty much anything that could be defined as a 'region'. Up until now I've done this by creating a mesh defining the 'region' on the CPU and interrogating that mesh during the landscape tile generation; I then add regional information to the landscape tile via a series of Vertex boolean properties. For each landscape tile vertex I do a ray-mesh intersect into the 'region' mesh and get some value from that mesh.

      For example my landscape vertex could be;
      struct Vtx { Vector3 Position; bool IsForest; bool IsRoad; bool IsRiver; } I would then have a region mesh defining a forest, another defining rivers etc. When generating my landscape veretexes I do an intersect check on the various 'region' meshes to see what kind of landscape that vertex falls within.

      My ray-mesh intersect code isn't particularly fast, and there may be many 'region' meshes to interrogate, and I want to see if I can move this work onto the GPU, so that when I create a set of tile vertexes I can call a compute/other shader and pass the region mesh to it, and interrogate that mesh inside the shader. The output would be a buffer where all the landscape vertex boolean values have been filled in.

      The way I see this being done is to pass in two RWStucturedBuffer to a compute shader, one containing the landscape vertexes, and the other containing some definition of the region mesh, (possibly the region might consist of two buffers containing a set of positions and indexes). The compute shader would do a ray-mesh intersect check on each landscape vertex and would set the boolean flags on a corresponding output buffer.

      In theory this is a parallelisable operation (no one landscape vertex relies on another for its values) but I've not seen any examples of a ray-mesh intersect being done in a compute shader; so I'm wondering if my approach is wrong, and the reason I've not seen any examples, is because no-one does it that way. If anyone can comment on;
      Is this a really bad idea ? If no-one does it that way, does everyone use a Texture to define this kind of 'region' information ? If so - given I've only got a small number of possible types of region, what Texture Format would be appropriate, as 32bits seems really wasteful. Is there a common other approach to adding information to a basic height-mapped tile system that would perform well for runtime generated tiles ? Thanks
      Phillip
    • By GytisDev
      Hello,
      without going into any details I am looking for any articles or blogs or advice about city building and RTS games in general. I tried to search for these on my own, but would like to see your input also. I want to make a very simple version of a game like Banished or Kingdoms and Castles,  where I would be able to place like two types of buildings, make farms and cut trees for resources while controlling a single worker. I have some problem understanding how these games works in the back-end: how various data can be stored about the map and objects, how grids works, implementing work system (like a little cube (human) walks to a tree and cuts it) and so on. I am also pretty confident in my programming capabilities for such a game. Sorry if I make any mistakes, English is not my native language.
      Thank you in advance.
  • Advertisement