shadow buf size!!!!

Blender's renderer and external renderer export

Moderators: jesterKing, stiv

alltaken
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 7:08 am

shadow buf size!!!!

Postby alltaken » Thu Apr 17, 2003 6:24 am

ok i have been doing some rendering on 2.26 (i know its the same in all the other versions oo)


well anyway my models are SO tiny and detailed that even if i set buf size at 2560 (i think its bytes perhaps dunno)

samples to 16 and soften it a bit i still get jaggys

oh yeah and i set clip sta and clip end to the Closest values to the extremes of my models.


anyway couls we please get the buf size INCREASED.

i have 1Gb RAM so ram ain't a problem and speed of render is not a problem because i have a 2.4Ghz.



anywayi would really like a buf size of e.g

2560
5120
10240
20480
40960
81920
163840



i dunno just as HIGH as possible. unless there is some kind of addressing issue where they don't have the code to address ANY MORE detail.

i hate the jaggys i want great shadows from blender


anyway thanks!!!!!

Alltaken

Pablosbrain
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 7:39 pm

Postby Pablosbrain » Thu Apr 17, 2003 4:12 pm

I would agree, I would like to have higher resolution shadow maps if possible!?

cessen
Posts: 156
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:43 pm

Postby cessen » Tue Apr 22, 2003 8:45 pm

I think that allowing arbitrary shadow-buffer sizes would be nice. However, your problem is not necessarily the shadow buffer size.

alltaken wrote:well anyway my models are SO tiny and detailed that even if i set buf size at 2560 (i think its bytes perhaps dunno)


The shadow buffers are "bufsize"x"bufsize" pixels large. So selecting 2560 gives you a 2560x2560 shadow buffer.

alltaken wrote:well anyway my models are SO tiny and detailed that even if i set buf size at 2560 (i think its bytes perhaps dunno) samples to 16 and soften it a bit i still get jaggys


Are the jaggys the size of the rendered image's pixels, or are they larger?
And what's the size of the spot-light (i.e. its "FOV")?
And how zoomed in is the camera?

alltaken wrote:oh yeah and i set clip sta and clip end to the Closest values to the extremes of my models.


That's not necessarily a good thing.

As a side note (mostly to myself), I really should write a tutorial explaining how shadow buffers work, and what all the parameters actually do. A lot of people's confusion simply comes from not understanding how to set-up shadow buffers effectively.

alltaken
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 7:08 am

Postby alltaken » Wed Apr 23, 2003 5:02 pm

cessen i do understand shadow buffers well and even know how they work.


i know how to set them up for optimum results and have done that.

clip sta is set just outside the distance of the closest object to the light.
and clip end is set to the last point that i want a shadow cast.

the angle of the lamps is average in width, its only as wide as it need be.

the thing is the jaggys are about 20x20 renderd pixels (depending on the resolution of render) but are on a diagonal to the screen so obviously nothing to do with OVERSAMPLING.



the reason the jaggys are there is because i am rather zoomed in and the models are VERY DETAILED.

so that is my issue, i could show you a render as long as nobody else saw it because it is part of the exodus project so secret, but it is NOT MY SET UP

it is the buff size 2560x2560 isn't big enough (i have used textures that are 4kx4k before and still awnted more detail.



Alltaken

i'm just a "high end user" as philips has labeled me on their data base

green
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2002 8:04 pm

Postby green » Wed Apr 23, 2003 7:15 pm

OK. I have implemented support for user selectable shadowbuffer resolution between 512 and 5120 in tuhopuu.

I am not sure if values over 5120 would be very nice. I tried with 10240 and blender took up 400mb ram(one spotlight with a plane and a cube) and I hadto kill it.

This is now in the tuhopuu cvs

cessen
Posts: 156
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:43 pm

Postby cessen » Wed Apr 23, 2003 11:37 pm

alltaken wrote:cessen i do understand shadow buffers well and even know how they work.


Ok. I wasn't saying that you didn't, I just wanted to make sure of what you were saying (it's difficult to trouble shoot a problem without a detailed description of the problem).

alltaken wrote:so that is my issue, i could show you a render as long as nobody else saw it because it is part of the exodus project so secret, but it is NOT MY SET UP


I don't think I need to see a render--you've given me enough info now to verify that your problem really was what you said it was (and you have certainly demonstrated your knowlege of shadow buffers).

green wrote:I am not sure if values over 5120 would be very nice. I tried with 10240 and blender took up 400mb ram(one spotlight with a plane and a cube) and I hadto kill it.


I think that the users should still have the option of selecting shadow buffers as large as they wish. It may not be a good idea to set shadow buffer resolutions that high, but protecting the newbies at the expense of flexability for high-end users is not a good idea. Perhaps there should simply be a warning dialoug that pops up if the user selects a resolution higher than 5120, that says something like "Warning: shadow buffers larger than 5120 is not recommended, and may cause the rendering to go very slowly, or even freeze."

Anyway, if the aliasing problem is causing jaggys that are 20 pixels large, a resolution increase to 5120 isn't going to solve the problem.

One last thing: ideally, the button-based selection of the shadow-buffer res' should be a number-field where the user can enter any number they want. I haven't looked at the shadow buffer code, though, so I'm not sure how feasable this would be (perhaps the shadow-buffer code relies on the resolution being a multiple of some number, or some such thing).

green
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2002 8:04 pm

Postby green » Thu Apr 24, 2003 8:12 am

it relies on it being in a multiple of 16.
the user can enter any number(numerical input button). and the code then makes it into a multiple of 16 by rounding it down.

alltaken
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 7:08 am

Postby alltaken » Thu Apr 24, 2003 10:36 pm

green wrote:it relies on it being in a multiple of 16.
the user can enter any number(numerical input button). and the code then makes it into a multiple of 16 by rounding it down.




ummm but 2560 is not a multiple of 16????

most of the buff sizes in blender are not multiples of 16 only the first few then suddenly they become (multiples of 16) x10

unless they are typos???



Alltaken

green
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2002 8:04 pm

Postby green » Thu Apr 24, 2003 11:16 pm

alltaken wrote:
green wrote:it relies on it being in a multiple of 16.
the user can enter any number(numerical input button). and the code then makes it into a multiple of 16 by rounding it down.




ummm but 2560 is not a multiple of 16????

most of the buff sizes in blender are not multiples of 16 only the first few then suddenly they become (multiples of 16) x10

unless they are typos???



Alltaken


I dont know. using multiples of 16 worked. multiples of 32 worked. multiples of 64 worked

anything else I tried didnt work. but I didnt try all multiples there are to try :)

alltaken
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 7:08 am

Postby alltaken » Fri Apr 25, 2003 7:36 am

multiples of 8
multiples of 4
multiples of 2


see if they work.


p.s. do they have to be to the POWER OF 2 or can they be a strange multiple of 16

e.g. 16x3 = 48

could you have one as 48x48 pixels??

Hmmm so multiples of work, rather than just anything^2.




alltaken

green
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2002 8:04 pm

Postby green » Fri Apr 25, 2003 8:17 am

alltaken wrote:multiples of 8
multiples of 4
multiples of 2


see if they work.


p.s. do they have to be to the POWER OF 2 or can they be a strange multiple of 16

e.g. 16x3 = 48

could you have one as 48x48 pixels??

Hmmm so multiples of work, rather than just anything^2.




alltaken



as I tried 64 32 and 16, dont you think I would have tried 8 4 and 2 aswell?

alltaken
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 7:08 am

Postby alltaken » Fri Apr 25, 2003 3:34 pm

no well i dunno :? :? :?


what i was asking is wether its MULTIPLES, or to the POWER OF.


is it the standard 2^ of whatever e.g

2
4
8
16
32
64
128
256
512
1024
2048
4096
.....



or is it anything that is mutlipled by 16 etc... e.g. 48 (which is NOT standard binary as you now)


i was just wanting to understand if the buff size is limited to 2^# or if it could be done in smaller integers????

could you perhaps list some numbers you tried that worked???

unless its a hassle then don't bother.



thanks

Alltaken

green
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2002 8:04 pm

Postby green » Fri Apr 25, 2003 3:41 pm

I did that, I said that 64, 32 and 16 worked. anything else I tried failed :)

ideasman
Posts: 1000
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2003 2:37 pm

Postby ideasman » Tue May 13, 2003 9:37 am

Its funny, files saved from tuhopuu blender will open in normal 2.26 stable blender and render with 5120 of shadow buff size even though the size isn't supported by the gui.

I am happy about this because I can only get blender tuhopuu for linux, but I have access to rooms full of Win2000 2ghz PC's overnight/weekend.


Return to “Rendering”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests