Shadows are seldom black in real life. Just look around you.Gubbi said:
Provocative comment by Id member about PS2 (and Gamecube)!
- Thread starter bbot
- Start date
shadows are never black unless u somehow find a way to eliminate every other form of ambient light leaving one and only one light source AND create a vacuum so that the light frequency isnt disturbed.
ok, u could do without the vacuum on most situations, but the real problem is ambient lighting really....
light from the sun will never create a black shadow since, obviously, there are so many light sources hitting us it's not even worth counting.
one situation would be a dark room with only one light source, and not a strong one either... then maybe u could get a completely black shadow, but even then u'd have ambient light in the form of the same light coming out from the single lightsource being scattered against the walls, and the lack of a vacuum plays a part too.
ok, u could do without the vacuum on most situations, but the real problem is ambient lighting really....
light from the sun will never create a black shadow since, obviously, there are so many light sources hitting us it's not even worth counting.
one situation would be a dark room with only one light source, and not a strong one either... then maybe u could get a completely black shadow, but even then u'd have ambient light in the form of the same light coming out from the single lightsource being scattered against the walls, and the lack of a vacuum plays a part too.
You don't need real time radiosity to render transparent shadows that look more realistic than cartoon-like black shadows.
I'm not saying D3 is not looking good even though the shadows are not realistic (shade).
It could even have less visual impact if the shadows were not so emphasized. Propably it's as much an artistic desision as tehnical limitation.
True, D3 is not released yet, so we'll see.
I'm not saying D3 is not looking good even though the shadows are not realistic (shade).
It could even have less visual impact if the shadows were not so emphasized. Propably it's as much an artistic desision as tehnical limitation.
True, D3 is not released yet, so we'll see.
Ok, not transparent, like you really can't see through a shadow, as a a shadow can not be projected on thin air.
But if a shadow is projected on a semi-transparent surface, you can still see through that surface. The shadow certainly doesn't make a magical 100% opague layer on a surface.
But if a shadow is projected on a semi-transparent surface, you can still see through that surface. The shadow certainly doesn't make a magical 100% opague layer on a surface.
not in doubt.
and one of the pluses of JC's new engine is not strictly an 'accurate' shadowing but a Unified ligthing model for shadow projection. in those terms it's looking rather juicy.
[/quote]no doubt, that the shadow effects in SH3 look very nice. but there are a few differences: only one light will cast a shadow (if you notice in dark rooms your flashlight casts the shadow and in rooms with some other light source it does not) and not every object creates a shadow (it's not really a global effect, it's special-cased[/quote]
yea there are a bunch of hacks in the game in the way it handles shadows. the point that I was trying to make is irrespective of SH3 is that stencil and fillrate intensive operations are not exactly cumbersome on PS2.
the limiting factor is the stuff it has little to no chance of doing (DOT3 cheifly) is the brick wall to a adequate 'port'.
maskraider,
nope. i dont think that is a good shot to show the blocky shadows. IIRC, you need to angle the camera so it is showing Heather's back, you know, something like a typical 3rd person behind view. Or at least level with Heather. IIRC again, i noticed the blocky shadows during the very early part when you first exit to the stairways. You can play around with the cam, and you can see that the shadows arent exactly rounded as Heather.
ANYWAY, go play D3 demo peeps. The way dynamic lights/shadows done is very cool.
nope. i dont think that is a good shot to show the blocky shadows. IIRC, you need to angle the camera so it is showing Heather's back, you know, something like a typical 3rd person behind view. Or at least level with Heather. IIRC again, i noticed the blocky shadows during the very early part when you first exit to the stairways. You can play around with the cam, and you can see that the shadows arent exactly rounded as Heather.
ANYWAY, go play D3 demo peeps. The way dynamic lights/shadows done is very cool.
Outside putting your monster into black void, I can't really think of ways to get black shadowsGubbi said:
Actually it offers an explanation of the said 'fact' which is where it could steem controversy from.
On the other hand, the first half of this topic, posters from all sides latched onto the fact part and ignored the said explanation, so it would seem there's enough controversy to pass around.
You remember them reversed. D3 shadows are blocky (low poly), SH3 are not.Chap said:
You might find that easier if you tried a few actual games instead of playing screenshots.
Anyway, to add some crap of my own to the topic. I wouldn't argue light pixel operations being prohibitively expensive on PS2 and geometry being for GC, but I don't really see the reverse being true for either.
actually ,normal mapping ("fake" geometry ) provides the very high contrast i'm talking about ,causing artifacting.
and the blending mode for D3 shadows is "replace with that black-edgy-poly" period.Ambiant lighting is not practicle because it would not blend with black shadows.
THere's also no "global illumination" in D3 .Just all lights are dynamics and are shadow volume based.
There's a difference between engine and the game built on it though.
Tradeoffs - to date the media shown for D3 mostly shown one shadowcasting light as well. Moreover I am pretty damn sure they mix in other shadowing techniques occasionaly as well (you can see some screens showing a few things that look nothing at all like volumes they use for the rest of the scene).
I don't know why you guys ar eusing SH3 as an example, considerig it has such a short draw distance it can't be compared toa first person shooter. If the PS2 is really capable of handling the lights, and showdows of doom 3 ina first person shooter, then why haven't we seen or why is there a first person shooter in development, or any game for that matter that using light/shadows in a way similar to doom 3?
I kept telling you guys before, that gamecube isn't quite a powerfull as xbox with it's fixed T&L. Doom 3 actually pushes some high amounts of geometry, although we haven't seen the game running at it's highest detail level.
I kept telling you guys before, that gamecube isn't quite a powerfull as xbox with it's fixed T&L. Doom 3 actually pushes some high amounts of geometry, although we haven't seen the game running at it's highest detail level.
Does the draw distance really matter?
Doesn't it all come down to how much polygons and detail is displayed on screen?
I don't know, I'm asking.
Aren't the processing power requirements for long draw distance basically the same as for a scene with lower draw distance but more polygon detail?
For example, there was long dd in an Amiga game 'Sentinel' but the polycount and fps were low.
Doesn't it all come down to how much polygons and detail is displayed on screen?
I don't know, I'm asking.
Aren't the processing power requirements for long draw distance basically the same as for a scene with lower draw distance but more polygon detail?
For example, there was long dd in an Amiga game 'Sentinel' but the polycount and fps were low.
IF they are stencils then they are algorithmically very similar in implementation*full stop*.
SH3's shadow 'are' blocky and exhibit the stairstep type of aliasing. RE:remake had simliar issues, althoug for them I'd assume it was a low res shadowmap?
dunno, ask the devs if you like.
*if DOT3 BM was so simple in powerVR on the dreamcast why the not prolifaration in it's titles?*
it is commonly accepted that the DC died before the above came into being, the PS2 has been around longer where are the stencil derived GFX?
it's not, what I'd like is to get a feel as to 'why' this is the case. what's the performence killer in GC's case? the 'geforce2 can run doom3, GC can't ergo GC is subpar' isn;t really informative is it?
Fafalada said:Outside putting your monster into black void, I can't really think of ways to get black shadowsGubbi said:
Well. Black, as in not adding any light to the pixels that are in the shadow. This doesn't mean that the pixels in a shadow will end up black, ambient light and other light sources can add to the luminance of the pixels.
On capabilities: Funny how Hollenshead jumps on the vertex power of the PS2. What the PS2 lack in order to do D3 is bumpmapping and cube environment mapping.
Cheers
Gubbi
Panajev2001a
Veteran
Shadowing in Silent Hill is not far from what DOOM III does: I am sure that achieving these soft shadows does burn some cycles and harder shadows would help.
Ever heard of sub-surface scattering ( of course you have Gubbi ) ? That is because skin IS indeed not 100% opaque and I suspect monters' skin might follow the same concept.
The main point is that, thanks to light being both absorbed from surfaces and reflected, the chance of shadows as black as the ones in DOOM III is not exactly high in real-life.
Silent Hill 3 seems to use more than the single light-source ( flash-light ) and that is used, IMHO, to convey the effect of the light coming from the flash-light bouncing off the objects and illuminating other parts of the scene not directly hit from the flashlight.
Ever heard of sub-surface scattering ( of course you have Gubbi ) ? That is because skin IS indeed not 100% opaque and I suspect monters' skin might follow the same concept.
The main point is that, thanks to light being both absorbed from surfaces and reflected, the chance of shadows as black as the ones in DOOM III is not exactly high in real-life.
Silent Hill 3 seems to use more than the single light-source ( flash-light ) and that is used, IMHO, to convey the effect of the light coming from the flash-light bouncing off the objects and illuminating other parts of the scene not directly hit from the flashlight.
I got into this discussion because I object to the notion that the dark/black shadows of D3 is a consequence of the technology used.
It isn't. As stated earlier: nothing prevents id from adding high degree of ambient light to a scene.
The shadows look the way they do because id want it that way and use shadows to develop a certain style of gameplay, think film noir or horror movies.
Imagine playing as the Marine in Alien vs. Predator with a D3 engine.
Cheers
Gubbi
It isn't. As stated earlier: nothing prevents id from adding high degree of ambient light to a scene.
The shadows look the way they do because id want it that way and use shadows to develop a certain style of gameplay, think film noir or horror movies.
Imagine playing as the Marine in Alien vs. Predator with a D3 engine.
Cheers
Gubbi
Similar threads
