This is the problem I am facing simplified:
Using directx I need to draw two(or more) exactly (in the same 2d plane) overlapping triangles. The triangles are semi transparent but the effect I want to release is that they clip to transparency of a single triangle. The picture below might depict the problem better.
Is there a way to do this?
I use this to get overlapping transparent triangles to not "accumulate". You need to create a blendstate and set it on output merge.
blendStateDescription.AlphaToCoverageEnable = false;
blendStateDescription.RenderTarget[0].IsBlendEnabled = true;
blendStateDescription.RenderTarget[0].SourceBlend = D3D11.BlendOption.SourceAlpha;
blendStateDescription.RenderTarget[0].DestinationBlend = D3D11.BlendOption.One; //
blendStateDescription.RenderTarget[0].BlendOperation = D3D11.BlendOperation.Maximum;
blendStateDescription.RenderTarget[0].SourceAlphaBlend = D3D11.BlendOption.SourceAlpha; //Zero
blendStateDescription.RenderTarget[0].DestinationAlphaBlend = D3D11.BlendOption.DestinationAlpha;
blendStateDescription.RenderTarget[0].AlphaBlendOperation = D3D11.BlendOperation.Maximum;
blendStateDescription.RenderTarget[0].RenderTargetWriteMask = D3D11.ColorWriteMaskFlags.All;
Hope this helps. Code is in C# but it works the same in C++ etc. Basically, takes the alpha of both source and destination, compares and takes the max. Which will always be the same (as long as you use the same alpha on both triangles) otherwise it will render the one with the most alpha.
edit: I've added a sample of what the blending does in my project. The roads here overlap. Overlap Sample
My pixel shader is as:
I pass the UV co-ords in a float4.
xy = uv coords.
w is the alpha value.
Pixel shader code
float4 pixelColourBlend;
pixelColourBlend = primaryTexture.Sample(textureSamplerStandard, input.uv.xy, 0);
pixelColourBlend.w = input.uv.w;
clip(pixelColourBlend.w - 0.05f);
return pixelColourBlend;
Ignore my responses, couldn't edit them...grrrr.
Enabling the depth stencil prevents this problem
Related
I have a Goldberg polyhedron that I have procedurally generated. I would like to draw an outline effect around a group of “faces” (let's call them tiles) similar to the image below, preferably without generating two meshes, doing the scaling in the vertex shader. Can anyone help?
My assumption is to use a scaled version of the tiles to write into a stencil buffer, then redraw those tiles comparing the stencil to draw the outline (as usual for this kind of effect), but I can't come up with an elegant solution to scale the tiles.
My best idea so far is to get the center point of the neighbouring tiles (green below) for each edge vertex (blue) and move the vertex towards them weighted by how many there are, which would leave the interior ones unmodified and the exterior ones moved inward. I think this works in principle, but I would need to generate two meshes as I couldn't do scaling this way in the vertex shader (as far as I know).
If it’s relevant this is how the polyhedron is constructed. Each tile is a separate object, the surface is triangulated with a central point and there is another point at the polyhedron’s origin (also the tile object’s origin). This is just so the tiles can be scaled uniformly and protrude from the polyhedron without creating gaps or overlaps.
Thanks in advance for any help!
EDIT:
jsb's answer was a simple and elegant solution to this problem. I just wanted to add some extra information in case someone else has the same problem.
First, here is the C# code I used to calculate these UVs:
// Use duplicate vertex count (over 4)
var vertices = mesh.vertices;
var uvs = new Vector2[vertices.Length];
for(int i = 0; i < vertices.Length; i++)
{
var duplicateCount = vertices.Count(s => s == vertices[i]);
var isInterior = duplicateCount > 4;
uvs[i] = isInterior ? Vector2.zero : Vector2.one;
}
Note that this works because I have not welded any vertices in my original mesh so I can count the adjoining triangles by just looking for duplicate vertices.
You can also do it by counting triangles like this (this would work with merged vertices, at least with how Unity's mesh data is laid out):
// Use triangle count using this vertex (over 4)
var triangles = mesh.triangles;
var uvs = new Vector2[mesh.vertices.Length];
for(int i = 0; i < triangles.Length; i++)
{
var triCount = triangles.Count(s => mesh.vertices[s] == mesh.vertices[triangles[i]]);
var isInterior = triCount > 4;
uvs[i] = isInterior ? Vector2.zero : Vector2.one;
}
Now on to the following problem. In my use case I also need to generate outlines for irregular tile patterns like this:
I neglected to mention this in the original post. Jsb's answer is still valid but the above code will not work as is for this. As you can see, when we have a tile that is only connected by one edge, the connecting vertices only "share" 2 interior triangles so we get an "exterior" edge. As a solution to this I created extra vertices along the the exterior edges of the tiles like so:
I did this by calculating the half way point along the vector between the original exterior tile vertices (a + (b - a) * 0.5) and inserting a point there. But, as you can see, the simple "duplicate vertices > 4" no longer works for determining which tiles are on the exterior.
My solution was to wind the vertices in a specific order so I know that every 3rd vertex is one I inserted along the edge like this:
Vector3 a = vertex;
Vector3 b = nextVertex;
Vector3 c = (vertex + (nextVertex - vertex) * 0.5f);
Vector3 d = tileCenter;
CreateTriangle(c, d, a);
CreateTriangle(c, b, d);
Then modify the UV code to test duplicates > 2 for these vertices (every third vertex starting at 0):
// Use duplicate vertex count
var vertices = mesh.vertices;
var uvs = new Vector2[vertices.Length];
for(int i = 0; i < vertices.Length; i++)
{
var duplicateCount = vertices.Count(s => s == vertices[i]);
var isMidPoint = i % 3 == 0;
var isInterior = duplicateCount > (isMidPoint ? 2 : 4);
uvs[i] = isInterior ? Vector2.zero : Vector2.one;
}
And here is the final result:
Thanks jsb!
One option that avoids a second mesh would be texturing:
Let's say you define 1D texture coordinates on the triangle vertices like this:
When rendering the mesh, use these coordinates to look up in a 1D texture which defines the interior and border color:
Of course, instead of using a texture, you can just as well implement this behavior in a fragment shader by thresholding the texture coordinate, conceptually:
if (u > 0.9)
fragColor = white;
else
fragColor = gray;
To update the outline, you would only need upload a new set of tex coords, which are just 1 for vertices on the outline and 0 everywhere else.
Depending on whether you want the outlines to extend only into the interior of the selected region or symmetrically to both sides of the boundary, you would need to specify the tex coords either per-corner or per-vertex, respectively.
So I'm trying to "outline" 3D objects. Standard problem, for which the answer is meant to be that you copy the mesh, color it the outline color, scale it up, and then set it to only render faces that are "pointed in the wrong direction" - for us that means setting side:THREE.BackSide in the material. Eg here https://stemkoski.github.io/Three.js/Outline.html
But see what happens for me
Here's what I'd like to make
I have a bunch of objects that are close together - they get "inside" one another's outline.
Any advice on what I should do? What I want to be seeing is everywhere on the rendered frame that these shapes touch the background or each other, there you have outline.
What do you want to happen? Is that one mesh in your example or is it a bunch of intersecting meshes. If it's a bunch of intersecting meshes do you want them to have one outline? What about other meshes? My point is you need some way to define which "groups" of meshes get a single outline if you're using multiple meshes.
For multiple meshes and one outline a common solution is to draw all the meshes in a single group to a render target to generate a silhouette, then post process the silhouette to expand it. Finally apply the silhouette to the scene. I don't know of a three.js example but the concept is explained here and there's also many references here
Another solution that might work, should be possible to move the outline shell back in Z so doesn't intersect. Either all the way back (Z = 1 in clip space) or back some settable amount. Drawing with groups so that a collection of objects in front has an outline that blocks a group behind would be harder.
For example if I take this sample that prisoner849 linked to
And change the vertexShaderChunk in OutlineEffect.js to this
var vertexShaderChunk = `
#include <fog_pars_vertex>
uniform float outlineThickness;
vec4 calculateOutline( vec4 pos, vec3 objectNormal, vec4 skinned ) {
float thickness = outlineThickness;
const float ratio = 1.0; // TODO: support outline thickness ratio for each vertex
vec4 pos2 = projectionMatrix * modelViewMatrix * vec4( skinned.xyz + objectNormal, 1.0 );
// NOTE: subtract pos2 from pos because BackSide objectNormal is negative
vec4 norm = normalize( pos - pos2 );
// ----[ added ] ----
// compute a clipspace value
vec4 pos3 = pos + norm * thickness * pos.w * ratio;
// do the perspective divide in the shader
pos3.xyz /= pos3.w;
// just return screen 2d values at the back of the clips space
return vec4(pos3.xy, 1, 1);
}
`;
It's easier to see if you remove all references to reflectionCube and set the clear color to white renderer.setClearColor( 0xFFFFFF );
Original:
After:
I'm using the Phaser framework. Here is the jsfiddle:
http://jsfiddle.net/Dillybob/u3mGL/13/
Here is where the filter is getting populated:
background = game.add.sprite(0, 0);
background.width = 800;
background.height = 600;
filter = game.add.filter('Fire', 800, 600);
filter.alpha = 0.0;
background.filters = [filter];
My line object is assigned to the variable drawnObject
So I assign that object to receive the filter like so:
drawnObject.filters = [filter];
But my line is now a red fiery square instead of being a line with a fiery background, why?
Firstly, be aware that drawnObject is actually a bitmap, which is rectangular shaped. It consists of white pixels, which build your line, and transparent pixels, which are taking the rest of bitmap space.
The filter you use is a pixel shader. Pixel shader describes instructions that GPU invokes for each pixel of a provided bitmap. In case of this shader, it creates fire effect based on some noise functions, but it doesn't take original bitmap into account. The original color of pixels is not preserved, it doesn't add to final effect in any way.
To achieve your expected result, you have to amend fragmentSrc in Fire.js, so that shader uses and mixes/blends original color into final pixel color and/or doesn't change pixel transparency.
I am currently trying to implement semi-transparent polygons in sharpdx.
At the moment I am using GraphicsDevice and BasicEffect to draw my objects.
// Setup the vertices
game.GraphicsDevice.SetVertexBuffer(myModel.vertices);
game.GraphicsDevice.SetVertexInputLayout(myModel.inputLayout);
// Apply the basic effect technique and draw the object
basicEffect.CurrentTechnique.Passes[0].Apply();
game.GraphicsDevice.Draw(PrimitiveType.TriangleList, myModel.vertices.ElementCount);
This is working fine for normal objects, however I would like to make some of the objects partially transparent. I've set the alpha value of these object's colors to 50, however they are still being rendered as opaque. What do I need to do to achieve this effect?
Transparency in Sharpdx requires alpha blending value 0..1 for float colors. The comment Nico Schertler provided above solved the question and can be regarded as answer.
Without Alpha mode, there are two options, that you can use in the HLSL shader file
In the Pixel shader, use the clip() function, dependent on the input color. You could define your transparent black and not show any black triangles. Like so:
float4 PS( PS_IN input ) : SV_Target
{
clip(input.color[3] < 0.1f ? -1:1 );
return input.color;
}
ref: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/direct3dhlsl/dx-graphics-hlsl-clip
See the effect:
modify the Vertex Shader to project these vertices to (0,0,0), dependent on the input color. You could define your transparent black and not show any black triangles. Like so:
PS_IN VS( VS_IN input)
{
PS_IN output = (PS_IN)0;
if ((input.color[0]!=0)||(input.color[1]!=0)||(input.color[2]!=0))
{
output.position = mul(worldViewProj,input.position);
}
output.color = input.color;
return output;
}
See below the effect on the edges of my HeightField mesh, on the left is the unchanged version..
NOTE: The latter solution gives sharper edges, but it only works when (0,0,0) is behind the object.
Is there any example out there of a HLSL written .fx file that splats a tiled texture with different tiles?Like this: http://messy-mind.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/transitions.jpg you can see theres a different tile type in each square and there's a little blurring between them to make a smoother transition,but right now I just need to find a way to draw the tiles on a texture.I have a 2D array of integers,each integer equals a corresponding tile type(0 = grass,1 = stone,2 = sand).I opened up a few HLSL examples and they were really confusing.Everything is running fine on the C++ side,but HLSL is proving to be difficult.
You can use a technique called 'texture splatting'. It mixes several textures (color maps) using another texture which contains alpha values for each color map. The texture with alpha values is an equivalent of your 2D array. You can create a 3-channel RGB texture and use each channel for a different color map (in your case: R - grass, G - stone, B - sand). Every pixel of this texture tells us how to mix the color maps (for example R=0 means 'no grass', G=1 means 'full stone', B=0.5 means 'sand, half intensity').
Let's say you have four RGB textures: tex1 - grass, tex2 - stone, tex3 - sand, alpha - mixing texture. In your .fx file, you create a simple vertex shader which just calculates the position and passes the texture coordinate on. The whole thing is done in pixel shader, which should look like this:
float tiling_factor = 10; // number of texture's repetitions, you can also
// specify a seperate factor for each texture
float4 PS_TexSplatting(float2 tex_coord : TEXCOORD0)
{
float3 color = float3(0, 0, 0);
float3 mix = tex2D(alpha_sampler, tex_coord).rgb;
color += tex2D(tex1_sampler, tex_coord * tiling_factor).rgb * mix.r;
color += tex2D(tex2_sampler, tex_coord * tiling_factor).rgb * mix.g;
color += tex2D(tex3_sampler, tex_coord * tiling_factor).rgb * mix.b;
return float4(color, 1);
}
If your application supports multi-pass rendering you should use it.
You should use a multi-pass shader approach where you render the base object with the tiled stone texture in the first pass and on top render the decal passes with different shaders and different detail textures with seperate transparent alpha maps.
(Transparent map could also be stored in your detail texture, but keeping it seperate allows different tile-levels and more flexibility in reusing it.)
Additionally you can use different texture coordinate channels for each decal pass one so that you do not need to hardcode your tile level.
So for minimum you need two shaders, whereas Shader 2 is used as often as decals you need.
Shader to render tiled base texture
Shader to render one tiled detail texture using a seperate transparency map.
If you have multiple decals z-fighting can occur and you should offset your polygons a little. (Very similar to basic simple fur rendering.)
Else you need a single shader which takes multiple textures and lays them on top of the base tiled texture, this solution is less flexible, but you can use one texture for the mix between the textures (equals your 2D-array).