Atmospheric light scattering FAQ: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
Line 30: Line 30:


Please don't point to other sims having effect XY and claim we should be able to have the same - that's quite often not true because FG operates with its own constraints (compatibility, scenery framework, basic rendering architecture,...) and never helpful.
Please don't point to other sims having effect XY and claim we should be able to have the same - that's quite often not true because FG operates with its own constraints (compatibility, scenery framework, basic rendering architecture,...) and never helpful.
== Effect XY really looks ugly under some conditions - why is that? ==
A good example for this is the urban relief effect which looks poor under shallow view angles, another the tree shadows which can 'hang' over a precipice.
Real-time 3d rendering is the art of illusion - trying to render it 'for real' would take far too long. So it's not a matter of 'if' the illusion breaks but of 'when' - and that correlates with performance footprint.
A fairly frequent situation is that one can design something that works for 99% of use cases and takes some performance. Making it work for 99.9% of use cases might take a factor 100 more performance, making it work for 99.99% a factor 10.000 - taking special cases into account quickly requires vastly more expensive techniques.
So there's a line drawn somewhere. For instance, the urban relief shader is a great way to generate the illusion of many buildings from high up, but if you look into the math of [http://www.science-and-fiction.org/rendering/glsl_11.html Relief maps], you discover that it can't work under shallow view angles. It's equally possible to put explicit 3d models of buildings - but in the same number, they become vastly more expensive to render.


[[Category:Shaders]]
[[Category:Shaders]]
1,360

edits

Navigation menu