How to make a take a circle out of a shader? - glsl

I'm working on a game using GLSL shaders
I'm using Go with the library Pixel, it's a 2d game and there's no "camera" (I've had people suggest using a second camera to achieve this)
My current shader is just a basic grayscale shader
#version 330 core
in vec2 vTexCoords;
out vec4 fragColor;
uniform vec4 uTexBounds;
uniform sampler2D uTexture;
void main() {
// Get our current screen coordinate
vec2 t = (vTexCoords - uTexBounds.xy) / uTexBounds.zw;
// Sum our 3 color channels
float sum = texture(uTexture, t).r;
sum += texture(uTexture, t).g;
sum += texture(uTexture, t).b;
// Divide by 3, and set the output to the result
vec4 color = vec4( sum/3, sum/3, sum/3, 1.0);
fragColor = color;
}
I want to take out a circle of the shader to show the color of objects almost like light is shining on them.
This is an example of what I'm trying to achieve
I can't really figure out what to search to find a shadertoy example or something that does this, but I've seen something similar before so I'm pretty sure it's possible.
To restate; I basically just want to remove part of the shader.
Not sure if using shaders is the best way to approach this, if there's another way then please let me know and I will remake the question.

You can easily extend this to use any arbitrary position as the "light."
Declare a uniform buffer to store the current location and a radius.
If the distance from the given location to the current pixel is less than the radius squared return the current color.
Otherwise, return its greyscale.
vec2 displacement = t - light_location;
float distanceSq = (displacement.x * displacement.x + displacement.y * displacement.y)
float radiusSq = radius * radius;
if(distanceSq < radiusSq) {
fragColor = texture(uTexture);
} else {
float sum = texture(uTexture).r;
sum += texture(uTexture).g;
sum += texture(uTexture).b;
float grey = sum / 3.0f;
fragColor = vec4(grey, grey, grey, 1.0f);
}

Related

Resizing window cause my 2D Lighting to stretch

I am trying to implement a simple artificial 2D lighting. I am not using an algorithm like Phong's. However, I am having some difficulty in ensuring that my lighting do not stretch/squeeze whenever the window resize. Any tips and suggestions will be appreciated. I have tried converting my radius into a vec2 so that I can scale them accordingly based on the aspect ratio, however it doesnt work properly. Also, I am aware that my code is not the most efficient, any feedback is also appreciated as I am still learning! :D
I have an orthographic projection matrix transforming the light position so that it will be at the correct spot in the viewport, this fixed the position but not the radius (as I am calculating per fragment). How would I go about transforming the radius based on the aspect ratio?
void LightSystem::Update(const OrthographicCamera& camera)
{
std::vector<LightComponent> lights;
for (auto& entity : m_Entities)
{
auto& light = g_ECSManager.GetComponent<LightComponent>(entity);
auto& trans = g_ECSManager.GetComponent<TransformComponent>(entity);
if (light.lightEnabled)
{
light.pos = trans.Position;
glm::mat4 viewProjMat = camera.GetViewProjectionMatrix();
light.pos = viewProjMat * glm::vec4(light.pos, 1.f);
// Need to store all the light atrributes in an array
lights.emplace_back(light);
}
// Create a function in Render2D.cpp, pass all the arrays as a uniform variable to the shader, call this function here
glm::vec2 res{ camera.GetWidth(), camera.GetHeight() };
Renderer2D::DrawLight(lights, camera, res);
}
}
Here is my shader:
#type fragment
#version 330 core
layout (location = 0) out vec4 color;
#define MAX_LIGHTS 10
uniform struct Light
{
vec4 colour;
vec3 position;
float radius;
float intensity;
} allLights[MAX_LIGHTS];
in vec4 v_Color;
in vec2 v_TexCoord;
in float v_TexIndex;
in float v_TilingFactor;
in vec4 fragmentPosition;
uniform sampler2D u_Textures[32];
uniform vec4 u_ambientColour;
uniform int numLights;
uniform vec2 resolution;
vec4 calculateLight(Light light)
{
float lightDistance = length(distance(fragmentPosition.xy, light.position.xy));
//float ar = resolution.x / resolution.y;
if (lightDistance >= light.radius)
{
return vec4(0, 0, 0, 1); //outside of radius make it black
}
return light.intensity * (1 - lightDistance / light.radius) * light.colour;
}
void main()
{
vec4 texColor = v_Color;
vec4 netLightColour = vec4(0, 0, 0, 1);
if (numLights == 0)
color = texColor;
else
{
for(int i = 0; i < numLights; ++i) //Loop through lights
netLightColour += calculateLight(allLights[i]) + u_ambientColour;
color = texColor * netLightColour;
}
}
You must use an orthographic projection matrix in the vertex shader. Modify the clip space position through the projection matrix.
Alternatively, consider the aspect ratio when calculating the distance to the light:
float aspectRatio = resolution.x/resolution.y;
vec2 pos = fragmentPosition.xy * vec2(aspectRatio, 1.0);
float lightDistance = length(distance(pos.xy, light.position.xy));
I'm going to compile all the answers for my question, as I had done a bad job in asking and everything turned out to be a mess.
As the other answers suggest, first I had to use an orthographic projection matrix to ensure that the light source position was displayed at the correct position in the viewport.
Next, from the way I did my lighting, the projection matrix earlier would not fix the stretch effect as my light wasn't an actual circle object made with actual vertices. I had to turn radius into a vec2 type, representing the radius vectors along x and y axis. This is so that I can then modify the vectors based on the aspect ratio:
if (aspectRatio > 1.0)
light.radius.x /= aspectRatio;
else
light.radius.x /= aspectRatio;
I had posted another question here, to modify my lighting algorithm to support an ellipse shape. This allowed me to then perform the scalings needed to counter the stretching along x/y axis whenever my aspect ratio changed. Thank you all for the answers.

Banding Problem in Multi Step Shader with Ping Pong Buffers, does not happen in ShaderToy

I am trying to implement a Streak shader, which is described here:
http://www.chrisoat.com/papers/Oat-SteerableStreakFilter.pdf
Short explanation: Samples a point with a 1d kernel in a given direction. The kernel size grows exponentially in each step. Color values are weighted based on distance to sampled point and summed. The result is a smooth tail/smear/light streak effect on that direction. Here is the frag shader:
precision highp float;
uniform sampler2D u_texture;
varying vec2 v_texCoord;
uniform float u_Pass;
const float kernelSize = 4.0;
const float atten = 0.95;
vec4 streak(in float pass, in vec2 texCoord, in vec2 dir, in vec2 pixelStep) {
float kernelStep = pow(kernelSize, pass - 1.0);
vec4 color = vec4(0.0);
for(int i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
float sampleNum = float(i);
float weight = pow(atten, kernelStep * sampleNum);
vec2 sampleTexCoord = texCoord + ((sampleNum * kernelStep) * (dir * pixelStep));
vec4 texColor = texture2D(u_texture, sampleTexCoord) * weight;
color += texColor;
}
return color;
}
void main() {
vec2 iResolution = vec2(512.0, 512.0);
vec2 pixelStep = vec2(1.0, 1.0) / iResolution.xy;
vec2 dir = vec2(1.0, 0.0);
float pass = u_Pass;
vec4 streakColor = streak(pass, v_texCoord, dir, pixelStep);
gl_FragColor = vec4(streakColor.rgb, 1.0);
}
It was going to be used for a starfield type of effect. And here is the implementation on ShaderToy which works fine:
https://www.shadertoy.com/view/ll2BRG
(Note: Disregard the first shader in Buffer A, it just filters out the dim colors in the input texture to emulate a star field since afaik ShaderToy doesn't allow uploading custom textures)
But when I use the same shader in my own code and render using ping-pong FrameBuffers, it looks different. Here is my own implementation ported over to WebGL:
https://jsfiddle.net/1b68eLdr/87755/
I basically create 2 512x512 buffers, ping-pong the shader 4 times increasing kernel size at each iteration according to the algorithm and render the final iteration on the screen.
The problem is visible banding, and my streaks/tails seem to be losing brightness a lot faster: (Note: the image is somewhat inaccurate, the lengths of the streaks are same/correct, its color values that are wrong)
I have been struggling with this for a while in Desktop OpenGl / LWJGL, I ported it over to WebGL/Javascript and uploaded on JSFiddle in hopes someone can spot what the problem is. I suspect it's either about texture coordinates or FrameBuffer configuration since shaders are exactly the same.
The reason it works on Shadertoys is because it uses a floating-point render target.
Simply use gl.FLOAT as the type of your framebuffer texture and the issue is fixed (I could verify it with the said modification on your JSFiddle).
So do this in your createBackingTexture():
// Just request the extension (MUST be done).
gl.getExtension('OES_texture_float');
gl.texImage2D(gl.TEXTURE_2D, 0, gl.RGBA, this._width, this._height, 0, gl.RGBA, gl.FLOAT, null);

Strange Voxel Cone Tracing Results

Im currently in the process of writing a Voxel Cone Tracing Rendering Engine with C++ and OpenGL. Everything is going rather fine, except that I'm getting rather strange results for wider cone angles.
Right now, for the purposes of testing, all I am doing is shoot out one singular cone perpendicularly to the fragment normal. I am only calculating 'indirect light'. For reference, here is the rather simple Fragment Shader I'm using:
#version 450 core
out vec4 FragColor;
in vec3 pos_fs;
in vec3 nrm_fs;
uniform sampler3D tex3D;
vec3 indirectDiffuse();
vec3 voxelTraceCone(const vec3 from, vec3 direction);
void main()
{
FragColor = vec4(0, 0, 0, 1);
FragColor.rgb += indirectDiffuse();
}
vec3 indirectDiffuse(){
// singular cone in direction of the normal
vec3 ret = voxelTraceCone(pos_fs, nrm);
return ret;
}
vec3 voxelTraceCone(const vec3 origin, vec3 dir) {
float max_dist = 1f;
dir = normalize(dir);
float current_dist = 0.01f;
float apperture_angle = 0.01f; //Angle in Radians.
vec3 color = vec3(0.0f);
float occlusion = 0.0f;
float vox_size = 128.0f; //voxel map size
while(current_dist < max_dist && occlusion < 1) {
//Get cone diameter (tan = cathetus / cathetus)
float current_coneDiameter = 2.0f * current_dist * tan(apperture_angle * 0.5f);
//Get mipmap level which should be sampled according to the cone diameter
float vlevel = log2(current_coneDiameter * vox_size);
vec3 pos_worldspace = origin + dir * current_dist;
vec3 pos_texturespace = (pos_worldspace + vec3(1.0f)) * 0.5f; //[-1,1] Coordinates to [0,1]
vec4 voxel = textureLod(tex3D, pos_texturespace, vlevel); //get voxel
vec3 color_read = voxel.rgb;
float occlusion_read = voxel.a;
color = occlusion*color + (1 - occlusion) * occlusion_read * color_read;
occlusion = occlusion + (1 - occlusion) * occlusion_read;
float dist_factor = 0.3f; //Lower = better results but higher performance hit
current_dist += current_coneDiameter * dist_factor;
}
return color;
}
The tex3D uniform is the voxel 3d-texture.
Under a regular Phong shader (under which the voxel values are calculated) the scene looks like this:
For reference, this is what the voxel map (tex3D) (128x128x128) looks like when visualized:
Now we get to the actual problem I'm having. If I apply the shader above to the scene, I get following results:
For very small cone angles (apperture_angle=0.01) I get roughly what you might expect: The voxelized scene is essentially 'reflected' perpendicularly on each surface:
Now if I increase the apperture angle to, for example 30 degrees (apperture_angle=0.52), I get this really strange 'wavy'-looking result:
I would have expected a much more similar result to the earlier one, just less specular. Instead I get mostly the outline of each object reflected in a specular manner with some occasional pixels inside the outline. Considering this is meant to be the 'indirect lighting' in the scene, it won't look exactly good even if I add the direct light.
I have tried different values for max_dist, current_dist etc. aswell as shooting several cones instead of just one. The result remains similar, if not worse.
Does someone know what I'm doing wrong here, and how to get actual remotely realistic indirect light?
I suspect that the textureLod function somehow yields the wrong result for any LOD levels above 0, but I haven't been able to confirm this.
The Mipmaps of the 3D texture were not being generated correctly.
In addition there was no hardcap on vlevel leading to all textureLod calls returning a #000000 color that accessed any mipmaplevel above 1.

Uniform point arrays and managing fragment shader coordinates systems

My aim is to pass an array of points to the shader, calculate their distance to the fragment and paint them with a circle colored with a gradient depending of that computation.
For example:
(From a working example I set up on shader toy)
Unfortunately it isn't clear to me how I should calculate and convert the coordinates passed for processing inside the shader.
What I'm currently trying is to pass two array of floats - one for x positions and one for y positions of each point - to the shader though a uniform. Then inside the shader iterate through each point like so:
#ifdef GL_ES
precision mediump float;
precision mediump int;
#endif
uniform float sourceX[100];
uniform float sourceY[100];
uniform vec2 resolution;
in vec4 gl_FragCoord;
varying vec4 vertColor;
varying vec2 center;
varying vec2 pos;
void main()
{
float intensity = 0.0;
for(int i=0; i<100; i++)
{
vec2 source = vec2(sourceX[i],sourceY[i]);
vec2 position = ( gl_FragCoord.xy / resolution.xy );
float d = distance(position, source);
intensity += exp(-0.5*d*d);
}
intensity=3.0*pow(intensity,0.02);
if (intensity<=1.0)
gl_FragColor=vec4(0.0,intensity*0.5,0.0,1.0);
else if (intensity<=2.0)
gl_FragColor=vec4(intensity-1.0, 0.5+(intensity-1.0)*0.5,0.0,1.0);
else
gl_FragColor=vec4(1.0,3.0-intensity,0.0,1.0);
}
But that doesn't work - and I believe it may be because I'm trying to work with the pixel coordinates without properly translating them. Could anyone explain to me how to make this work?
Update:
The current result is:
The sketch's code is:
PShader pointShader;
float[] sourceX;
float[] sourceY;
void setup()
{
size(1024, 1024, P3D);
background(255);
sourceX = new float[100];
sourceY = new float[100];
for (int i = 0; i<100; i++)
{
sourceX[i] = random(0, 1023);
sourceY[i] = random(0, 1023);
}
pointShader = loadShader("pointfrag.glsl", "pointvert.glsl");
shader(pointShader, POINTS);
pointShader.set("sourceX", sourceX);
pointShader.set("sourceY", sourceY);
pointShader.set("resolution", float(width), float(height));
}
void draw()
{
for (int i = 0; i<100; i++) {
strokeWeight(60);
point(sourceX[i], sourceY[i]);
}
}
while the vertex shader is:
#define PROCESSING_POINT_SHADER
uniform mat4 projection;
uniform mat4 transform;
attribute vec4 vertex;
attribute vec4 color;
attribute vec2 offset;
varying vec4 vertColor;
varying vec2 center;
varying vec2 pos;
void main() {
vec4 clip = transform * vertex;
gl_Position = clip + projection * vec4(offset, 0, 0);
vertColor = color;
center = clip.xy;
pos = offset;
}
Update:
Based on the comments it seems you have confused two different approaches:
Draw a single full screen polygon, pass in the points and calculate the final value once per fragment using a loop in the shader.
Draw bounding geometry for each point, calculate the density for just one point in the fragment shader and use additive blending to sum the densities of all points.
The other issue is your points are given in pixels but the code expects a 0 to 1 range, so d is large and the points are black. Fixing this issue as #RetoKoradi describes should address the points being black, but I suspect you'll find ramp clipping issues when many are in close proximity. Passing points into the shader limits scalability and is inefficient unless the points cover the whole viewport.
As below, I think sticking with approach 2 is better. To restructure your code for it, remove the loop, don't pass in the array of points and use center as the point coordinate instead:
//calc center in pixel coordinates
vec2 centerPixels = (center * 0.5 + 0.5) * resolution.xy;
//find the distance in pixels (avoiding aspect ratio issues)
float dPixels = distance(gl_FragCoord.xy, centerPixels);
//scale down to the 0 to 1 range
float d = dPixels / resolution.y;
//write out the intensity
gl_FragColor = vec4(exp(-0.5*d*d));
Draw this to a texture (from comments: opengl-tutorial.org code and this question) with additive blending:
glEnable(GL_BLEND);
glBlendFunc(GL_ONE, GL_ONE);
Now that texture will contain intensity as it was after your original loop. In another fragment shader during a full screen pass (draw a single triangle that covers the whole viewport), continue with:
uniform sampler2D intensityTex;
...
float intensity = texture2D(intensityTex, gl_FragCoord.xy/resolution.xy).r;
intensity = 3.0*pow(intensity, 0.02);
...
The code you have shown is fine, assuming you're drawing a full screen polygon so the fragment shader runs once for each pixel. Potential issues are:
resolution isn't set correctly
The point coordinates aren't in the range 0 to 1 on the screen.
Although minor, d will be stretched by the aspect ratio, so you might be better scaling the points up to pixel coordinates and diving distance by resolution.y.
This looks pretty similar to creating a density field for 2D metaballs. For performance you're best off limiting the density function for each point so it doesn't go on forever, then spatting discs into a texture using additive blending. This saves processing those pixels a point doesn't affect (just like in deferred shading). The result is the density field, or in your case per-pixel intensity.
These are a little related:
2D OpenGL ES Metaballs on android (no answers yet)
calculate light volume radius from intensity
gl_PointSize Corresponding to World Space Size
It looks like the point center and fragment position are in different coordinate spaces when you subtract them:
vec2 source = vec2(sourceX[i],sourceY[i]);
vec2 position = ( gl_FragCoord.xy / resolution.xy );
float d = distance(position, source);
Based on your explanation and code, source and source are in window coordinates, meaning that they are in units of pixels. gl_FragCoord is in the same coordinate space. And even though you don't show that directly, I assume that resolution is the size of the window in pixels.
This means that:
vec2 position = ( gl_FragCoord.xy / resolution.xy );
calculates the normalized position of the fragment within the window, in the range [0.0, 1.0] for both x and y. But then on the next line:
float d = distance(position, source);
you subtrace source, which is still in window coordinates, from this position in normalized coordinates.
Since it looks like you wanted the distance in normalized coordinates, which makes sense, you'll also need to normalize source:
vec2 source = vec2(sourceX[i],sourceY[i]) / resolution.xy;

Resizing point sprites based on distance from the camera

I'm writing a clone of Wolfenstein 3D using only core OpenGL 3.3 for university and I've run into a bit of a problem with the sprites, namely getting them to scale correctly based on distance.
From what I can tell, previous versions of OGL would in fact do this for you, but that functionality has been removed, and all my attempts to reimplement it have resulted in complete failure.
My current implementation is passable at distances, not too shabby at mid range and bizzare at close range.
The main problem (I think) is that I have no understanding of the maths I'm using.
The target size of the sprite is slightly bigger than the viewport, so it should 'go out of the picture' as you get right up to it, but it doesn't. It gets smaller, and that's confusing me a lot.
I recorded a small video of this, in case words are not enough. (Mine is on the right)
Can anyone direct me to where I'm going wrong, and explain why?
Code:
C++
// setup
glPointParameteri(GL_POINT_SPRITE_COORD_ORIGIN, GL_LOWER_LEFT);
glEnable(GL_PROGRAM_POINT_SIZE);
// Drawing
glUseProgram(StaticsProg);
glBindVertexArray(statixVAO);
glUniformMatrix4fv(uStatixMVP, 1, GL_FALSE, glm::value_ptr(MVP));
glDrawArrays(GL_POINTS, 0, iNumSprites);
Vertex Shader
#version 330 core
layout(location = 0) in vec2 pos;
layout(location = 1) in int spriteNum_;
flat out int spriteNum;
uniform mat4 MVP;
const float constAtten = 0.9;
const float linearAtten = 0.6;
const float quadAtten = 0.001;
void main() {
spriteNum = spriteNum_;
gl_Position = MVP * vec4(pos.x + 1, pos.y, 0.5, 1); // Note: I have fiddled the MVP so that z is height rather than depth, since this is how I learned my vectors.
float dist = distance(gl_Position, vec4(0,0,0,1));
float attn = constAtten / ((1 + linearAtten * dist) * (1 + quadAtten * dist * dist));
gl_PointSize = 768.0 * attn;
}
Fragment Shader
#version 330 core
flat in int spriteNum;
out vec4 color;
uniform sampler2DArray Sprites;
void main() {
color = texture(Sprites, vec3(gl_PointCoord.s, gl_PointCoord.t, spriteNum));
if (color.a < 0.2)
discard;
}
First of all, I don't really understand why you use pos.x + 1.
Next, like Nathan said, you shouldn't use the clip-space point, but the eye-space point. This means you only use the modelview-transformed point (without projection) to compute the distance.
uniform mat4 MV; //modelview matrix
vec3 eyePos = MV * vec4(pos.x, pos.y, 0.5, 1);
Furthermore I don't completely understand your attenuation computation. At the moment a higher constAtten value means less attenuation. Why don't you just use the model that OpenGL's deprecated point parameters used:
float dist = length(eyePos); //since the distance to (0,0,0) is just the length
float attn = inversesqrt(constAtten + linearAtten*dist + quadAtten*dist*dist);
EDIT: But in general I think this attenuation model is not a good way, because often you just want the sprite to keep its object space size, which you have quite to fiddle with the attenuation factors to achieve that I think.
A better way is to input its object space size and just compute the screen space size in pixels (which is what gl_PointSize actually is) based on that using the current view and projection setup:
uniform mat4 MV; //modelview matrix
uniform mat4 P; //projection matrix
uniform float spriteWidth; //object space width of sprite (maybe an per-vertex in)
uniform float screenWidth; //screen width in pixels
vec4 eyePos = MV * vec4(pos.x, pos.y, 0.5, 1);
vec4 projCorner = P * vec4(0.5*spriteWidth, 0.5*spriteWidth, eyePos.z, eyePos.w);
gl_PointSize = screenWidth * projCorner.x / projCorner.w;
gl_Position = P * eyePos;
This way the sprite always gets the size it would have when rendered as a textured quad with a width of spriteWidth.
EDIT: Of course you also should keep in mind the limitations of point sprites. A point sprite is clipped based of its center position. This means when its center moves out of the screen, the whole sprite disappears. With large sprites (like in your case, I think) this might really be a problem.
Therefore I would rather suggest you to use simple textured quads. This way you circumvent this whole attenuation problem, as the quads are just transformed like every other 3d object. You only need to implement the rotation toward the viewer, which can either be done on the CPU or in the vertex shader.
Based on Christian Rau's answer (last edit), I implemented a geometry shader that builds a billboard in ViewSpace, which seems to solve all my problems:
Here are the shaders: (Note that I have fixed the alignment issue that required the original shader to add 1 to x)
Vertex Shader
#version 330 core
layout (location = 0) in vec4 gridPos;
layout (location = 1) in int spriteNum_in;
flat out int spriteNum;
// simple pass-thru to the geometry generator
void main() {
gl_Position = gridPos;
spriteNum = spriteNum_in;
}
Geometry Shader
#version 330 core
layout (points) in;
layout (triangle_strip, max_vertices = 4) out;
flat in int spriteNum[];
smooth out vec3 stp;
uniform mat4 Projection;
uniform mat4 View;
void main() {
// Put us into screen space.
vec4 pos = View * gl_in[0].gl_Position;
int snum = spriteNum[0];
// Bottom left corner
gl_Position = pos;
gl_Position.x += 0.5;
gl_Position = Projection * gl_Position;
stp = vec3(0, 0, snum);
EmitVertex();
// Top left corner
gl_Position = pos;
gl_Position.x += 0.5;
gl_Position.y += 1;
gl_Position = Projection * gl_Position;
stp = vec3(0, 1, snum);
EmitVertex();
// Bottom right corner
gl_Position = pos;
gl_Position.x -= 0.5;
gl_Position = Projection * gl_Position;
stp = vec3(1, 0, snum);
EmitVertex();
// Top right corner
gl_Position = pos;
gl_Position.x -= 0.5;
gl_Position.y += 1;
gl_Position = Projection * gl_Position;
stp = vec3(1, 1, snum);
EmitVertex();
EndPrimitive();
}
Fragment Shader
#version 330 core
smooth in vec3 stp;
out vec4 colour;
uniform sampler2DArray Sprites;
void main() {
colour = texture(Sprites, stp);
if (colour.a < 0.2)
discard;
}
I don't think you want to base the distance calculation in your vertex shader on the projected position. Instead just calculate the position relative to your view, i.e. use the model-view matrix instead of the model-view-projection one.
Think about it this way -- in projected space, as an object gets closer to you, its distance in the horizontal and vertical directions becomes exaggerated. You can see this in the way the lamps move away from the center toward the top of the screen as you approach them. That exaggeration of those dimensions is going to make the distance get larger when you get really close, which is why you're seeing the object shrink.
At least in OpenGL ES 2.0, there is a maximum size limitation on gl_PointSize imposed by the OpenGL implementation. You can query the size with ALIASED_POINT_SIZE_RANGE.