There are similarities. A pcm sample in a wavetable synth is similar in concept to a texture in 3D rendering, especially if the texture is based from a photograph.
The Holy Grail of 3D : Solving Current Limitations or Improving Upon Believability
- Thread starter Nom De Guerre
- Start date
The math required for dissecting or building sound or pictures is much the same. For starters, they both use Fourier analysis and transformation as their main method. Look at any lossy compression algorithm, for example. Or how you smooth out things that are digitized.
Last edited by a moderator:
Don't mean to derail the graphics discussion too much, but my experience is mainly with software synths. In that case you have samplers (which would be analoguous to textures); also there are generators such as subtractive synthesizers, and effects processors (which are mostly analoguous to shaders, in this case). Then as mentioned above you have wave-table or grain-table synths, which have a set of sampled sound 'packets' which are mathematically operated on to generate the waveforms (kind of like a shader operating on texture data).
Lots of similarities in my mind.
(BS hat on)
As for graphics, I think it will be very difficult to approach the limits of realism and immersion without orders of magnitude increases in use of textures. Let me qualify that by saying that the use of these textures may only be in the 'art' generation stage, while space and bandwidth limitations force the use of compression of these raw data by various means: fractals, procedurals, lossy compression, etc. The 'compressed' versions would have to be used for real time rendering. The challenge along these lines will be to find efficient methods to 'fit' the raw textures with an approximating procedural with enough detail.
Also, I think we may also see more and more textures being based on real-world photographs, and less on art a priori.
Of course, that is a view from outside, since I am not in the graphics industry.
(hat off)
ERK
Lots of similarities in my mind.
(BS hat on)
As for graphics, I think it will be very difficult to approach the limits of realism and immersion without orders of magnitude increases in use of textures. Let me qualify that by saying that the use of these textures may only be in the 'art' generation stage, while space and bandwidth limitations force the use of compression of these raw data by various means: fractals, procedurals, lossy compression, etc. The 'compressed' versions would have to be used for real time rendering. The challenge along these lines will be to find efficient methods to 'fit' the raw textures with an approximating procedural with enough detail.
Also, I think we may also see more and more textures being based on real-world photographs, and less on art a priori.
Of course, that is a view from outside, since I am not in the graphics industry.
(hat off)
ERK
Detail textures are good for some surfaces, not all. The trouble is that no matter how incredibly detailed a texture is, slap it on a flat surface(that shouldn`t be flat) and realism goes down the drain. That`s why per-pixel effects are required, to mimic geometric detail, to fake it. So I don`t think that texturing and shading can be sepparated. Not to mention that textures are used in shaders, they`re not something in a whole sepparated department.
DiGuru said:
There are some basic similarities, stuff like AA or filtering algorithms, but as soon as you move towards shaders, polygons, etc. that's where these end. I'd say sound can be compared to a small subset of the GFX maybe. But it's a matter of your POV in the end, so I'll stop derailing the thread
Blazkowicz
Legend
one of my favorite games graphics wise is Kingpin, awesome and quite realist even if it's the quake 2 engine.
Textures are lowres and stuff is blocky by our standards, but artists made a great job (best texturing ever), the dark lighting and realist setting make the game immersive, as well as the high quality sound effects and voice acting (french in my version ^)
and it ran at 60fps on my voodoo2, then at 60fps on voodoo5 with fsaa 4x.
I'd like technology to be frozen so we can have really awesome games with what we can do. (and that would allow high IQ settings on new games for poor people like me)
I cannot be impressed by mere technology anymore. I saw Oblivion running and said to me, "so what" (the bad things even jumped to my eyes : bad use of HDR, terrible LOD system, surfaces seemed to tell me, "this is bump-mapping!", and it was on a recent gamer LCD I found to suck if I'm not perfectly in front of it)
Textures are lowres and stuff is blocky by our standards, but artists made a great job (best texturing ever), the dark lighting and realist setting make the game immersive, as well as the high quality sound effects and voice acting (french in my version ^)
and it ran at 60fps on my voodoo2, then at 60fps on voodoo5 with fsaa 4x.
I'd like technology to be frozen so we can have really awesome games with what we can do. (and that would allow high IQ settings on new games for poor people like me
)I cannot be impressed by mere technology anymore. I saw Oblivion running and said to me, "so what" (the bad things even jumped to my eyes : bad use of HDR, terrible LOD system, surfaces seemed to tell me, "this is bump-mapping!", and it was on a recent gamer LCD I found to suck if I'm not perfectly in front of it)
It`s like with movies nowadays. PPL aren`t exactly psyched about stuff that if filmed like a real-time footage, something like Joe Reporter and his team getting it on. Artistic direction is very important for movies as well...there are some things that aren`t particularly realistic(as in the way you and I would see them IRL through our eyes), but that give a great artistic effect. I think that`s more important then havind a 1:1 copy of reality done.
Similar threads
