You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
What if instead of building a shadow map for sky lighting, we calculated the shadow from each object into a massive array of relatively low-res* shadow images, and merely projected that down onto land?
* Current shadow map is generally pretty big, 1024x1024 x light source count is standard.
We could easily make this 64x64 without anyone complaining... But large objects would drop quality.
Perhaps a giant 2d texture atlas as opposed to a 3D texture, thus allowing dynamic refitting? Would require more involved shader uniforms to pass the correct data in...
Using some trickery*, this could even allow transparent objects to cast full accurate shadows!
* Trickery would basically just be a second buffer alongside the first that identifies rough alpha value of each shadow pixel.
This would probably not be particularly efficient compared to standard shadow mapping, but might be worth a try?
Alternately, could be used for ONLY transparent shadows and NOT for opaques?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This should probably be sky light only, I don't see this being very effective with other light sources... but maybe it could be possible?
One step at a time: See how well it works for sky lights... if it goes well, try for other types!
Possibly as well: a 'mixed' mode.
Distant or insignificant or whatever objects get a generic area blast shadow, meanwhile important or close or whatever objects get individual scans.
I had an odd idea...
What if instead of building a shadow map for sky lighting, we calculated the shadow from each object into a massive array of relatively low-res
*
shadow images, and merely projected that down onto land?*
Current shadow map is generally pretty big,1024x1024
x light source count is standard.We could easily make this 64x64 without anyone complaining... But large objects would drop quality.
Perhaps a giant 2d texture atlas as opposed to a 3D texture, thus allowing dynamic refitting? Would require more involved shader uniforms to pass the correct data in...
Using some trickery
*
, this could even allow transparent objects to cast full accurate shadows!*
Trickery would basically just be a second buffer alongside the first that identifies rough alpha value of each shadow pixel.This would probably not be particularly efficient compared to standard shadow mapping, but might be worth a try?
Alternately, could be used for ONLY transparent shadows and NOT for opaques?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: