|
Sphinx.
|
Hard Shadows by jitspoe http://www.filterforge.com/filters/9464.html ![]() Njyldgarkn sample cache! |
|||
| Posted: March 9, 2011 5:24 am | ||||
|
Sphinx.
|
Finally in!
This filter is much welcome - I will return with further comments when I understand what the heck is going on in there - good work! Njyldgarkn sample cache! |
|||
| Posted: March 9, 2011 5:25 am | ||||
| jitspoe | Thanks. It's pretty simple. I just do a dot product with the normal for basic lighting (made a separate snippet for HDR normal maps for those who just care about that) and walk along a ray from each sample toward the light source and check if the heightmap is ever higher than that ray. If so, value = 0. Multiply blend the result with whatever your surface color is, then throw the whole thing into FF's lighting with a lot of ambient light to get the ambient occlusion. | |||
| Posted: March 9, 2011 9:51 am | ||||
| jffe |
Variation #1 looks pretty realistic, and variation 6 reminds me of some old filters I was making a year or two ago, making *fake* shadows for a 3-D look without using the HDR lighting mode. Cool stuff. jffe Filter Forger |
|||
| Posted: March 9, 2011 11:22 am | ||||
|
Betis
|
This combined with the new Satellite Image filter could do wonders. Roses are #FF0000
Violets are #0000FF All my base are belong to you. |
|||
| Posted: March 10, 2011 8:29 pm | ||||
| jitspoe |
Sure, why not? Too bad it takes like an hour to render, and the mountains are a bit rough, so the shadows are all spiked. I'm tempted to make a shadow-friendly satellite filter now. |
|||
| Posted: March 11, 2011 2:06 am | ||||
| jitspoe |
Did another test with some slight blur - looks better and renders faster, too! |
|||
| Posted: March 11, 2011 2:08 am | ||||
|
Betis
|
are you rendering it on top of the diffuse map or the already surface-lit product of the satellite? But I can see that it doesn't look as great as I had imagined. Try a more "solid" terrain? Wait I can do this, why am I ordering you to haha Roses are #FF0000
Violets are #0000FF All my base are belong to you. |
|||
| Posted: March 11, 2011 5:42 pm | ||||
| jitspoe |
More solid like this?
I think there's just too much noise in the trees for this to work well. It wasn't designed with shadow casting in mind. |
|||
| Posted: March 12, 2011 1:04 am | ||||
|
Betis
|
it's a little hard to tell where the shadows are but when you look closely it actually looks pretty good. btw you inspired me to create your anti-filter, ambient occlusion Roses are #FF0000
Violets are #0000FF All my base are belong to you. |
|||
| Posted: March 12, 2011 1:13 am | ||||
| jitspoe |
I dropped the heightmap down to 25%, and I think it looks a little better - less noisy, more like trees.
Attached the original w/o shadows for reference. |
|||
| Posted: March 12, 2011 1:15 am | ||||
| jitspoe |
Aww, thought editing would allow me to attach 2 images. Here's the lowered heightmap version: |
|||
| Posted: March 12, 2011 1:17 am | ||||
|
Betis
|
def better Roses are #FF0000
Violets are #0000FF All my base are belong to you. |
|||
| Posted: March 12, 2011 1:36 am | ||||
|
Betis
|
I modified your filter to accept already-AO'd images, color the light source, and control exposure. My ambient occlusion filter is used on the image/height initially, saved then used the result as the image into your filter, using the same height map, where I have your filter generate it's stuff and simply use an add component to combine the two. Pretty good huh? I love Qbert.![]() Roses are #FF0000
Violets are #0000FF All my base are belong to you. |
|||
| Posted: March 12, 2011 2:28 pm | ||||
| jitspoe |
Qbert 3.0? Looks like it's still a little rough around the edges... literally. |
|||
| Posted: March 13, 2011 7:42 pm | ||||
|
Betis
|
Yeah I think that's due to jpeg compression artifacts or something, but then again it gives it a little realistic feeling hehe Roses are #FF0000
Violets are #0000FF All my base are belong to you. |
|||
| Posted: March 13, 2011 10:38 pm | ||||
| jitspoe |
Kind of looks like a giant stack of pool cue chalk. All we need now is radiosity. I'm not sure I understand the need to render AO separately. Are you doing that in a different program or something? |
|||
| Posted: March 14, 2011 12:13 am | ||||
|
Betis
|
Funny you mention that. I made my own filter to do AO to save render time, but then I combined them because the light math was actually incorrect, and my AO filter was really fast (2 seconds for a full 1080p image). It looks better now and is about 50x more convenient hahaha. I'm working on an "export HDR" filter that clamps all positive values to 0-1. That's the easy part ( x/sqrt(x^2 + 1) ), but I need a formula that will reconvert those numbers into their original HDR values. Roses are #FF0000
Violets are #0000FF All my base are belong to you. |
|||
| Posted: March 14, 2011 12:27 am | ||||
|
Crapadilla
|
Oh man, this is awesome! --- Crapadilla says: "Damn you, stupid redundant feature requests!" ;) |
|||
| Posted: September 4, 2011 6:56 am | ||||
|
SpaceRay
|
Interesting and useful effect!!
YES, exactly, this is the same as I am thinking and I agree with you |
|||
| Posted: July 2, 2012 10:30 am | ||||
Filter Forge has a thriving, vibrant, knowledgeable user community. Feel free to join us and have fun!
15,375 Registered Users
+8 new last day!
112,621 Posts
+5 new last day!
10,102 Topics
+16 new in 7 days!
17 unregistered users.