Quality shadows in large environments
OK, so I tried various methods. As I read the adaptive shadow maps paper, I had the same feeling as sjelkjd: there must be a way to put that on hardware... Well, unfortunately, there isn''t. It requires a constant feedback loop between the fragment pipeline and the highlevel renderer. If a fragment gets to blurry, it actually queries the renderer to render additional geometry. This concept is totally incompatible with current 3D card design. Oh well.
I implemented the perspective shadowmaps paper, that is supposed to be presented on this year''s Siggraph. Works well, good quality most of the time. But their projection degenerates, if you look directly into the lightsource direction. The shadows kind of blur away, very weird effect. I''ll try to remove this behaviour.
Conclusion: there is no perfect shadow algorithm... What a surprise Thanks for the suggestions anyway !
OK, I agree with the 32bit depth channel, but a floating point stencil buffer ?! This would be fun having floating point inaccuracies using the increment/decrement stencil ops... You''d have stencil-fighting on shadow volumes
/ Yann
I implemented the perspective shadowmaps paper, that is supposed to be presented on this year''s Siggraph. Works well, good quality most of the time. But their projection degenerates, if you look directly into the lightsource direction. The shadows kind of blur away, very weird effect. I''ll try to remove this behaviour.
Conclusion: there is no perfect shadow algorithm... What a surprise Thanks for the suggestions anyway !
quote:
Ideally they would provide us with a float for depth channel and another float for stencil channel.
OK, I agree with the 32bit depth channel, but a floating point stencil buffer ?! This would be fun having floating point inaccuracies using the increment/decrement stencil ops... You''d have stencil-fighting on shadow volumes
/ Yann
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement