OpenGl Terrain blend seams

Materials, textures, lighting, postfx
24 posts Page 2 of 3
rlranft
Posts: 298
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:11 pm
 
by rlranft » Sun May 31, 2015 6:28 pm
There are bound to be little tweaks like this that come to light - OpenGL was dropped a while back and is just now making its way back in. And in that gap the terrain system changed - twice.

It's probably going to come down to little fiddling differences between drivers, but I hope not.
koros
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 2:54 am
by koros » Mon Jun 01, 2015 4:46 pm
rlranft wrote:There are bound to be little tweaks like this that come to light - OpenGL was dropped a while back and is just now making its way back in. And in that gap the terrain system changed - twice.

It's probably going to come down to little fiddling differences between drivers, but I hope not.


/agree

Unity has a 200+ page bug list, UE4 has issues and I don't mind getting my hands dirty for Torque3D.

Seams are solved for my project though. OpenGl works great for me on Win8.1. Can't wait to fire up a vm and test Linux.
The seams were the only thing that cropped up and I finally fixed that. :D
I am happy as long as I can craft a solution or workaround for an issue.

Whether the uv offset is a solution or just a workaround, that's for the real devs here to decide :D
rlranft
Posts: 298
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:11 pm
 
by rlranft » Fri Jun 05, 2015 1:30 am
It's a good catch, anyway - T3D has been run on Mac and a few flavors of Ubuntu and this is the first I've heard of this issue since it was fixed in the DirectX version. I suppose my point was that it is important to compare detailed notes between cases so someone can eventually track down the cause and the final solution (even if the final solution is just the uv tweak).
koros
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 2:54 am
by koros » Sat Jun 06, 2015 5:37 pm
rlranft wrote:... I suppose my point was that it is important to compare detailed notes between cases so someone can eventually track down the cause and the final solution (even if the final solution is just the uv tweak).


Absolutely.

The crew here is obviously working hard and I plan to help where I can with my limited Torque skills.

Appreciate the feedback too!

:D
Azaezel
Posts: 393
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:50 pm
 
by Azaezel » Thu Sep 10, 2015 5:30 pm
How'd you derive 0.00195?
koros
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 2:54 am
by koros » Thu Sep 10, 2015 6:20 pm
I'd love to be able to claim I derived it but then I had no idea how Torque textured the terrain.

Spent some time playing with shader gen locked down and just squeezing various values into ranges in the shaders,
coloring sections, using discard until I made some sense of it. Noticed that number along the way.

Looking for my notes, been a while.

Stop laughing! :D
koros
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 2:54 am
by koros » Thu Sep 10, 2015 6:49 pm
Mucked with asst. stuff in generated pixel shaders where the terrain detail blending was being done. Playing with tex coords etc.

Some of the files
14333febc477acdf_P.glsl
blendP.glsl
terrain.glsl



Doing stuff like this to visualize the lines

if( (detailBlend0 < 1.0) && (detailBlend1 < 1.0) )
{...}

or this

//auro uv values range: 64 to 128
//if( ( (uv.x <65.0) || (uv.y <65.0) ) || ( (uv.x >127.0) || (uv.y >127.0) ) ) // square perimeter
//{
//discard;
//}


I was just getting started with Torque and has been years since I touched a shader. :oops:
Azaezel
Posts: 393
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:50 pm
 
by Azaezel » Thu Sep 10, 2015 8:47 pm
Thing to remember about shaders, and particularly uvs, is 9999999.99999% of the math is gonna be in percentages, so that 0.00195 may be right when applied to the default tiling setup, but odds are it'll need adjusting for different scales. Make sense?
koros
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 2:54 am
by koros » Thu Sep 10, 2015 10:20 pm
Azaezel wrote:Thing to remember about shaders, and particularly uvs, is 9999999.99999% of the math is gonna be in percentages, so that 0.00195 may be right when applied to the default tiling setup, but odds are it'll need adjusting for different scales. Make sense?


Yep! Thx :)

Just so I don't think I'm nuts here are you able to reproduce this?
Azaezel
Posts: 393
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:50 pm
 
by Azaezel » Thu Sep 10, 2015 10:26 pm
Afraid not, it's why I've gotta stick to giving principle-based advice on this one.
24 posts Page 2 of 3

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest