How do I generate a "sketch" animation to introduce a 3D scene? - graphics

I get an image of a games 3D scene (using render to texture) rendered in OpenGL. How would I go about generating what looks like the image being sketched in real time? I'm just talking outlines with this, not colouring.
I haven't been able to find a decent example. I know they exist, but sadly I wasn't thinking of trying to imitate it, the last time I saw the effect, so I can't retrieve the original source.
The idea would be that the player would enter a new location. They would see a white screen, upon which the "scene" would appear to be sketched in real time, before fading into the actual 3D scene.
I would like to do this procedurally, rather than prerender it, so that any changes to the scene wouldn't need the extra work of changing the intro every time the scene is updated.

Related

How did Epic Games achieve this 3D effect on their Fortnite site?

I have been looking at Epic Games' Fortnites Website and I am trying to figure out how they achieved the 3D effect on the page:
Epic Games' Fortnite website - scrolled down to 3rd slide
Does any one have any idea how to do it? I would really like something similar to a project I'm working on. I have found Three.js, but I am quite sure that is not the solution they went with.
For these types of questions, i can only recommend to install spector.js and have a look yourself. In short: everything you see is 100% faked.
I mean, that's always the case. In fact, if you want to build something like that, your first question should always be: how much of this can I fake and still get away with that?
In this example, it turns out: everything. Just open the devtools and click through all the assets in the network-tab. You will find these two textures:
looks familiar, right?
So what they appear to be doing is they are using three.js with some custom shaders to handle the translations, the flickering of the lights and the highlighting. These effects are computed using the normal-map and an additional mask-texture which I couldn't quite figure out what it does. But again, if you look at the scene in spector.js you can see the shaders used for every drawcall.
The only thing that is a bit more complex is the little robot-friend in the bottom left corner. But again, it's not 3d as in meshes and so on but rather a set of flat textured quads running a bones-animation thing.
I think that makes it a really great website after all.
Given that epic is building the unreal-engine I would suspect the original renders were done there. And I agree, the lighting looks really amazing :)
It is a simple parallax effect using animated sprite sheets.
Parallax effect is achieved by using several layers of images/video on top of one another in different Z-depth.
You can achieve the moving part by using the mousemove event to track the cursor.

Render loop vs. explicitely calling update method

I am working on a 3D simulation program using openGL which uses a render loop with a fixed framerate to keep the screen updated as the world changes. Standard procedure really, and for a typical video game this is certainly the best approach (I originally took this code from an openGL game tutorial). But for me, the 3D scene will not be changing as rapidly and unpredictably as in a computer game. It will be possible for the 3D scene itself to change from time to time but in general it won't change between render calls (it's more of a visualisation tool for geometric problems). The user will be able to control the position/orientation of the camera but in general there will be times when the camera won't move for several seconds/minutes (potentially hundreds of render calls) and since the 3D scene is likely be static for the majority of the time, I wonder if I really need a continuous render loop...?
My thinking is that I will remove the automatic render loop and instead I will explicitly call my update method when either,
The 3D scene changes (very rare)
The camera moves (somewhat rare)
As I will be using this largely for research purposes, the scene/camera is likely to stay in one state for several minutes at a time and it seems silly to be continuously updating the frame buffer when it's not changing.
My question then is, is this a good approach? All the online tutorials for 3D graphics rendering seem to deal with game design but that's not really my requirement. In other words, what are the pros and cons of using a render loop vs. manually calling "update()" whenever something changes?
Thanks
There's no problem with this approach, in fact many 3D apps, like 3DS MAX use explicit rendering. You just pick what is better for your needs, in most games scene changes each frame so it's better to have update loop, but if you were doing some chess game, without animated UI you could also use explicit rendering only when the scene changes.
For apps with rare changes, like 3DS or Blender it would be better to call rendering only on change. This way you save the CPU/GPU but also power and your PC don't heat up so much.
With explicit rendering you can also have some performance tricks, like drawing simplified scene when camera moves, for better performance. Then when camera stops you render the full scene in background once again, and replace the low-quality rendering with the new one.

rotate the image rendered by pbrt

I have used pbrt to render my scene. I have specified the viewing angle in the scene file and on rendering it with pbrt I see the image from that specific viewing angle. I want to know if there exists a way by which I can rotate the scene rendered by pbrt using my mouse in real time
No.
To see if it is even possible, render a scene and time how ling it takes. In order to get it real-time you will need pbrt to render at least a few frames a second, preferably 60!
I don't think this is going to happen in 2016.
Alternatively you will need something like an OpenGL representation to perform the real-time interaction and then the rendered scene can only be displayed over the top (once the rendering has been finished). the frustums need to match in order for you to do this otherwise what the user interacts with will not be the same as what they see rendered.
If your editing the scene file, it sounds like your not in coding land and so the only possibility is to write some program that can display the scene (in GL) and update the scene file information to be the same as the current camera and render using pbrt. Its all going to take a long time (pbrt needs to parse the file each time, and re-buffer all the geometry) since supplying the file means pbrt won't save anything from the previous state and so will have to construct acceleration structures etc as well as rendering the scene. Each frame!
Even in code pbrt is not going to give you great performance. It's not designed for that, more to be a physically accurate path tracer (as the name suggests). In order to get anything remotely near real-time, you'll need some bad ass acceleration structures and better command of the light model you are using. If you really are interested your probably need to write your own renderer. Look into Metropolis Light Transport (MLT) and Vertex connect merge (VCM), which are much more refined/efficient models using Monte Carlo method.
Plus some pretty decent hardware with lots of cores, or a decent gfx card if wish to employ SIMD through Cuda or equivalent.
[EDIT] Also note that the pbrt renderer, is based on a book "Physically Based Rendering (From Theory to Implementation)" ISBN-13: 978-0123750792. Which outlines how to implement your own version of pbrt.

Is a drag-and-drop interface simply infeasible in Pygame?

I'm building a simple RPG using Pygame and would like to implement a drag-and-drop inventory. However, even with the consideration of blitting a separate surface, it seems that the entire screen will need to be recalculated every single time the user drags an item around. Would it be best to allow a limited range of motion, or is it simply not feasible to implement such an interface?
redrawing most or all of the screen is a very normal thing, across all windowing systems. this is rarely an issue, since most objects on screen can be drawn quickly.
To make this practical, it's necessary to organize all of the game objects that have to be drawn in such a way that they can be quickly found and drawn in the right order. This often means that objects of a particular type are grouped into some sort of layer. The drawing code can go through each layer, and for each object in each layer, ask the object to draw itself. If a particular layer is costly to draw, because it's got a lot of objects, can store a prerendered surface and blit that instead.
A really simple hack to get a similar effect is to capture the screen at the start of a drag to a surface, and then blit that every frame instead of the whole game. This obviously only makes sense in a game where dragging also means that the rest of the game is effectively paused.
There are many GUI examples on pygame.org, as well as libraries for GUIs.

How do I project lines dynamically on to 3D terrain?

I'm working on a game in XNA for Xbox 360. The game has 3D terrain with a collection of static objects that are connected by a graph of links. I want to draw the links connecting the objects as lines projected on to the terrain. I also want to be able to change the colors etc. of links as players move their selection around, though I don't need the links to move. However, I'm running into issues making this work correctly and efficiently.
Some ideas I've had are:
1) Render quads to a separate render target, and use the texture as an overlay on top of the terrain. I currently have this working, generating the texture only for the area currently visible to the camera to minimize aliasing. However, I'm still getting aliasing issues -- the lines look jaggy, and the game chugs frequently when moving the camera EDIT: it chugs all the time, I just don't have a frame rate counter on Xbox so I only notice it when things move.
2) Bake the lines into a texture ahead of time. This could increase performance, but makes the aliasing issue worse. Also, it doesn't let me dynamically change the properties of the lines without much munging.
3) Make geometry that matches the shape of the terrain by tessellating the line-quads over the terrain. This option seems like it could help, but I'm unsure if I should spend time trying it out if there's an easier way.
Is there some magical way to do this that I haven't thought of? Is one of these paths the best when done correctly?
Your 1) is a fairly good solution. You can reduce the jagginess by filtering -- first, make sure to use bilinear sampling when using the overlay. Then, try blurring the overlay after drawing it but before using it; if you choose a proper filter, it will remove the aliasing.
If it's taking too much time to render the overlay, try reducing its resolution. Without the antialiasing filter, that would just make it jaggier, but with a good filter, it might even look better.
I don't know why the game would chug only when moving the camera. Remember, you should have a separate camera for the overlay -- orthogonal, and pointing down onto the terrain.
Does XNA have a shadowing library? If so, yo could just pretend the lines are shadows.

Resources