My current project

NitroGL

NitroGL

Active member
I'm currently working on an engine, that has these features so far:

DOT3 bump mapping
Light intensity falloff (per-pixel)
Shadows

It still needs to be optimized, but it still runs pretty good.

Here's a screen shot (using the classic Cornel Box for the "level"):
cornelbox.jpg
 
Last edited:
Cooool :cool:

Looks pretty damn good I must say. Now some textures on it would hurt ... ;)

I wished I could get my Radeon 8500 soon so I can start to compete a little with ya about who makes the best demos :) It get increasingly annoying that no 8500's are shipping to sweden :mad:, it's simply not available anywhere. :( When I mailed the webshop about my order early this week they said they had finally got a preliminary date of 20th december, which is too late for me, I will leave town around that time. So I cancelled my order .. hopefully they will be available after xmas.
 
Hmmm

Hmmm

As you may notice, the picture is no longer working. If I type it in the address bar, I get the message; "The contents of this site are currently unavailable". Maybe they don't like you using the space just for pictures. I hate how they do that.
 
Re: Hmmm

Re: Hmmm

dhc014 said:
As you may notice, the picture is no longer working. If I type it in the address bar, I get the message; "The contents of this site are currently unavailable". Maybe they don't like you using the space just for pictures. I hate how they do that.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know.

It's so freekin hard to find a good stable *free* web space now-a-days...
 
The only good thing about AOL is that you can use the 2MB they give you for just about anything, including image posting!
 
dhc014 said:
The only good thing about AOL is that you can use the 2MB they give you for just about anything, including image posting!
Click to expand...

Yeah. Hmm... I'm on Charter Broadband (cable internet), I guess I can make use of that web space that they give with the subcription...
 
dhc014 said:
The only good thing about AOL is that you can use the 2MB they give you for just about anything, including image posting!
Click to expand...
Wow, maybe I should switch to AOL. Oh, wait...my ISP gives me 80 MB I can use for just about anything. :D
 
Hey, thats a Q3 female model with a rocket launcher and doom helmet (i suppose the doom girl model?)
Looks like she wishes to be on a horse as that box doesnt seem to do justice :D
 
Nitro,

Are you using the DOT3 portions of the Pixel Shaders to accomplish this bump mapping?

I'm just asking because the FPS looks surprisingly low, and I'm wondering if the Bump mapping is the culprit.
 
Fearless Leader said:
Nitro,

Are you using the DOT3 portions of the Pixel Shaders to accomplish this bump mapping?

I'm just asking because the FPS looks surprisingly low, and I'm wondering if the Bump mapping is the culprit.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the DOT3 does have something to do with it. But it's more of my unoptimized shadow volumes that are causing it (I'm using shadows on the WHOLE model, which includes all triangles).
 
Perf tips

Perf tips

NitroGL said:


Yeah, the DOT3 does have something to do with it. But it's more of my unoptimized shadow volumes that are causing it (I'm using shadows on the WHOLE model, which includes all triangles).
Click to expand...
I know you arent terribly worried about performance at the moment, but here are some pointers in case you arent already doing this:

Are you using a vertex program to do the shadow volume extrusion, or are you uploading a new volume every frame? It depends on other CPU load and model sizes as to which is faster: uploading optimized volumes, or using vertex shaders to create them from static geometry.

Also, while compression of normal maps looks ugly, i've found that on noisy bump maps RGB565 can look the same and get a touch of speed back, and you should almost always compress base maps. Play with that and also try playing with the texture filter modes particularly on the uncompressed maps.

Oh, and full screen can sometimes be faster than windowed mode.
 
Re: Perf tips

Re: Perf tips

CBrennan [ATI] said:

I know you arent terribly worried about performance at the moment, but here are some pointers in case you arent already doing this:

Are you using a vertex program to do the shadow volume extrusion, or are you uploading a new volume every frame? It depends on other CPU load and model sizes as to which is faster: uploading optimized volumes, or using vertex shaders to create them from static geometry.

Also, while compression of normal maps looks ugly, i've found that on noisy bump maps RGB565 can look the same and get a touch of speed back, and you should almost always compress base maps. Play with that and also try playing with the texture filter modes particularly on the uncompressed maps.

Oh, and full screen can sometimes be faster than windowed mode.
Click to expand...

I've tried to get that vertex shader shadow thing to work in OpenGL, but it doesn't seem to work right (if you have an OpenGL version, I'd like to see it).

I'm not doing to worry about the normal map stuff right now, since those were fairly large textures (could be fixed by making a smaller texture, and just changing the texture coords).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top