The graphics in Flash and non-fullscreen is anti-aliased and really smooth. But when go fullscreen or on mobile, the graphics become aliased. Even when I use SVG image.
Yes Flash has some great aliasing with software cpu based rendering. In the mobile targets of HaxeFlixel there is a method for drawing that is very different, mostly for performance reasons.
In HaxeFlixel the mobile and cpp targets will use the gpu which is more like webgl or Flash's Stage3d. This means that there will be differences in the way things like edges of images and text look.
Flixel and OpenFL do a very good job in making these two methods as similar as possible. Some recent work on text for cpp in OpenFL has been very impressive. I am not aware of any solution that makes the two pixel perfect in a complex game engine for every use case. You will find similar differences with aliasing in flash game engines like Starling which also use the gpu.
Some things you can try:
For OpenFL/HaxeFlixel I have set gpu antialiasing before, this should be the default:
<window antialiasing="4" />
If you are wanting to test, you will loose performance however I believe you can still set software rendering in cpp with.
FlxG.camera.antialiasing = true;
You mention SVG, I think you are assuming since its a vector format it should render perfectly. The gpu rendering first rasterises the image to a bitmap so if you are expecting it to scale etc like it does in the browser it wont. You could in this case use a higher resolution image and scale it down first.
Related
I'm looking at some older code which is rendering some images, animations, etc... for a website by generating a web page containing significant SVG elements. The result is a fairly complicated, interactive, interface. I've been tasked with migrating the application to instead generate WebGL calls.
This is a non-trivial task, considering all of the niceties that come with SVG, which are not directly available if going straight to a WebGL implementation. I've been debating whether I should pitch migrating to using something like Three.js instead, but don't know enough about the available options to make a good decision.
What are some reasonable options I should consider when trying to build my battle plan here?
I would suggest you look at http://code.google.com/p/canvg/ as an option.
I assume it is using getContext("2d") not getContext("experimental-webgl") or getContext("webgl").
WebGL provides a 3d interface and I am not sure if there is any advantage to using it for 2d graphics, since you don't have any 3d transforms for the GPU to work on. If they are interested in Canvas not specifically webgl ... Canvg would bring over some of the niceties of SVG which would be the source content.
If the issue is lack of support for SVG in browsers http://code.google.com/p/svgweb/ goes a long way to solving that problem.
My application produces an "animation" in a per-pixel manner, so i need to efficiently draw them. I've tried different strategies/libraries with unsatisfactory results especially at higher resolutions.
Here's what I've tried:
SDL: ok, but slow;
OpenGL: inefficient pixel operations;
xlib: better, but still too slow;
svgalib, directfb, (other frame buffer implementations): they seem perfect but definitely too tricky to setup for the end user.
(NOTE: I'm maybe wrong about these assertions, if it's so please correct me)
What I need is the following:
fast pixel drawing with performances comparable to OpenGL rendering;
it should work on Linux (cross-platform as a bonus feature);
it should support double buffering and vertical synchronization;
it should be portable for what concerns the hardware;
it should be open source.
Can you please give me some enlightenment/ideas/suggestions?
Are your pixels sparse or dense (e.g. a bitmap)? If you are creating dense bitmaps out of pixels, then another option is to convert the bitmap into an OpenGL texture and use OpenGL APIs to render at some framerate.
The basic problem is that graphics hardware will be very different on different hardware platforms. Either you pick an abstraction layer, which slows things down, or code more closely to the type of graphics hardware present, which isn't portable.
I'm not totally sure what you're doing wrong, but it could be that you are writing pixels one at a time to the display surface.
Don't do that.
Instead, create a rendering surface in main memory in the same format as the display surface to render to, and then copy the whole, rendered image to the display in a single operation. Modern GPU's are very slow per transaction, but can move lots of data very quickly in a single operation.
Looks like you are confusing window manager (SDL and xlib) with rendering library (opengl).
Just pick a window manager (SDL, glut, or xlib if you like a challenge), activate double buffer mode, and make sure that you got direct rendering.
What kind of graphical card do you have? Most likely it will process pixels on the GPU. Look up how to create pixel shaders in opengl. Pixel shaders are processing per pixel.
Let me describe the "battlefield" of my task:
Multi-room audio/video chat with more than 1M users;
Custom Direct3D renderer;
What I need to implement is a TextOverVideo feature. The Text itself goes via network and is to be rendered on the recipient side with Direct3D renderer. AFAIK, it is commonly used in game development to create your own texture with letters/numbers and draw this items. Because our application must support many languages, we ought to use a standard. That's why I've been working with ID3DXFont interface but I've found out some unsatisfied limitations.
What I've faced is a lack of scalability. E.g. if user is resizing video window I have to RE-create D3DXFont with new D3DXFONT_DESC while he's doing that. I think it is unacceptable.
That is why the ONLY solution I see (due to my skills) is somehow render the text to a texture and therefore draw sprite with scaling, translation etc.
So, I'm not sure if I go into the correct direction. Please help with advice, experience, literature, sources...
Your question is a bit unclear. As I understand it, you want easily scalable font.
I think it is unacceptable
As far as I know, this is standard behavior for fonts - even for system fonts. They aren't supposed to be easily scalable.
Possible solutions:
Use ID3DXRenderTarget for rendering text onto texture. Font will be filtered when you scale it up too much. Some people will think that it looks ugly.
Write custom library that supports vector fonts. I.e. - it should be able to extract font outline from font, and build text from it. It will be MUCH slower than ID3DXFont (which is already slower than traditional "texture" fonts). Text will be easily scalable. Using this way, you are very likely to get visible artifacts ("noise") for small text. I wouldn't use that approach unless you want huge letters (40+ pixels). Freetype library may have functions for processing font outlines.
Or you could try using D3DXCreateText. This will create 3D text for ONE string. Won't be fast at all.
I'd forget about it. As long as user is happy about overall performance, improving font rendering routines (so their behavior looks nice to you) is not worth the effort.
--EDIT--
About ID3DXRenderTarget.
EVen if you use ID3DXRenderTarget, you'll need ID3DXFont. I.e. you use ID3DXFont to render text onto texture, and then use texture to blit text onto screen.
Because you said that performance is critical, you can delay creation of new ID3DXFont until user stops resizing video. I.e. When user starts resizing video, you use old font, but upscale it using texture. There will be filtering, of course. Once user stops resizing, you create new font when you have time. you probably can do that in separate thread, but I'm not sure about it. OR you could simply always render text in the same resolution as video. This way you won't have to worry about resizing it (it still will be filtered - along with the video). Some video players work this way.
Few more things about ID3DXFont. There is one problem with ID3DXFont - it is slow in situations where you need a lot of text (but you still need it, because it supports unicode, and writing texturefont with unicode support is pain). Last time I worked with it I optimized things by caching commonly used strings in the textures. I.e. any string that was drawn more than 3 frames in the row were rendered onto D3DFMT_A8R8G8B8 texture/render target, and then I've been copying that string from texture instead of using ID3DXFont. Strings that weren't rendered for a while, were removed from texture. That gave some serious boost. This solution, however is tricky - monitoring empty space in the texture, removing unused strings, and defragmenting the texture isn't exactly trivial (there is nothing exceptionally complicated, but it is easy to make a mistake). You won't need such complicated system unless your screen is literally covered by text.
ID3DXFont fonts are flat, always parallel to the screen. D3DXCreateText are meshes that can be scaled and rotated.
Texture fonts are fuzzy and don't look very clear. Not good for an app that uses lots of small text.
I am writing an app that can create 500 text meshes, each mesh averaging 3,000-5,000 vertices. The text meshes are created once, then are static. I get 700 fps on a GeForce 8800.
Hey guys, I would like to develop a light/laser show editor and simulator, and for this of course I am going to learn some graphics programming. I am thinking about using C# and XNA.
I was just wondering what aspects of graphics programming I should research or focus on given the project I am working on. I am new to graphics programming so I don't know much about it, but for example I imagine something that I might look into would (possibly?) be volumetric lighting.
For example, what would be a practical way to go about rendering a 'laser' of varied width/color? I read somewhere to just draw a cylinder and apply a shader to it, I would like to confirm that this is the way.
Given that this seems like a big project, I was thinking about starting off by creating light sources and giving them properties so that I can easily manipulate them. I have (mis)read that only a certain amount of lights can be rendered at any given time, I believe eight. Does this only apply to ambient lights? Given this possible limitation, and the fact that most of the lights I will use will be directional, such as head-lights or lasers, what would be a different way to render these? Is that what volumetric lighting would be?
I'd just like to get some things clear before I dive into it. Since I'm new to this I probably didn't make the best use of words, so if something doesn't make sense please let me know. Thanks and sorry for my ignorance.
The answer to this depends on the level of sophistication that you need in your display simulation. Computer graphics is ultimately a simulation of the transport of light; that simulation can be as sophisticated as calculating the fraction of laser light deflected by particles in the atmosphere to the viewer's eyepoint, or as simple as drawing a line. Try out the cylinder effect and see if it works for your project. If you need something more sophisticated, look into shader programming (using Nvidia Cg, for example), and volumetric shading as you mentioned; also post-processing glow effects may be useful. For OpenGL, I believe there is a limit of 8? light sources in a scene, but you could conceivably work around this limit by doing your own shading logic.
Well if it's just for light show simulations I'd imagine your going to need a lot of custom lighting effects - so regardless if you decide to use XNA or straight DirectX your best bet would be to start by learning shader languages and how to program various lighting effects using them. Once you can reproduce the type of laser lighting you want, then you can experiment with the polygons you want to use to represent the lasers. (I've used the cylinder method in some of my work for personal purposes, but I'm not sure how well straight cylinders will fit your purpose).
Although its faster, I think its best not to use vanilla hardware lighting because of its limitations. Pixel shaders can help with you task. Also you may want to chose OpenGL because of portability and its clarity in rendering methods. I worked on Direct3D for several years before switching to OpenGL. OpenGL functions and states are easier to learn and rendering methods (like multi-pass rendering) is a lot clear. If you like to code on C# (which I dont recommend for these tasks), you can use CsGL library to access OpenGL functions.
I woud like to create a cross-platform drawing program. The one requirement for writing my app is that I have pixel level precision over the canvas. For instance, I want to write my own line drawing algorithm rather than rely on someone elses. I do not want any form of anti-aliasing (again, pixel level control is required.) I would like the users interactions on the screen to be quick and responsive (pending my ability to write fast algorithms.)
Ideally, I would like to write this in Python, or perhaps Java as a second choice. The ability to easily make the final app cross-platform is a must. I will submit to different API's on different OS'es if necessary as long as I can write an abstraction layer around them. Any ideas?
addendum: I need the ability to draw on-screen. Drawing out to a file I've got figured out.
I just this week put together some slides and demo code for doing 2d graphics using OpenGL from python using the library pyglet. Here's a representative post: Pyglet week 2, better vertex throughput (or 3D stuff using the same basic ideas)
It is very fast (relatively speaking, for python) I have managed to get around 1,000 independently positioned and oriented objects moving around the screen, each with about 50 vertices.
It is very portable, all the code I have written in this environment works on windows and Linux and mac (and even obscure environments like Pypy) without me ever having to think about it.
Some of these posts are very old, with broken links between them. You should be able to find all the relevant posts using the 'graphics' tag.
The Pyglet library for Python might suit your needs. It lets you use OpenGL, a cross-platform graphics API. You can disable anti-aliasing and capture regions of the screen to a buffer or a file. In addition, you can use its event handling, resource loading, and image manipulation systems. You can probably also tie it into PIL (Python Image Library), and definitely Cairo, a popular cross-platform vector graphics library.
I mention Pyglet instead of pure PyOpenGL because Pyglet handles a lot of ugly OpenGL stuff transparently with no effort on your part.
A friend and I are currently working on a drawing program using Pyglet. There are a few quirks - for example, OpenGL is always double buffered on OS X, so we have to draw everything twice, once for the current frame and again for the other frame, since they are flipped whenever the display refreshes. You can look at our current progress in this subversion repository. (Splatterboard.py in trunk is the file you'll want to run.) If you're not up on using svn, I would be happy to email you a .zip of the latest source. Feel free to steal code if you look into it.
If language choice is open, a Flash file created with Haxe might have a place. Haxe is free, and a full, dynamic programming language. Then there's the related Neko, a virtual machine (like Java's, Ruby's, Parrot...) to run on Mac, Windows and Linux. Being in some ways a new improved form of Flash, naturally it can draw stuff. http://haxe.org/
QT's Canvas an QPainter are very good for this job if you'd like to use C++. and it is cross platform.
There is a python binding for QT but I've never used it.
As for Java, using SWT, pixel level manipulation of a canvas is somewhat difficult and slow so I would not recommend it. On the other hand Swing's Canvas is pretty good and responsive. I've never used the AWT option but you probably don't want to go there.
I would recommend wxPython
It's beautifully cross platform and you can get per pixel control and if you change your mind about that you can use it with libraries such as pyglet or agg.
You can find some useful examples for just what you are trying to do in the docs and demos download.