I am trying to implement a custom interpolation technique in GLSL shader.
I have switched off the default OpenGL bilinear filters using flat interpolation specifier for my texture coordinates. I followed the technique that is specified in the below link:
How to switch off default interpolation in OpenGL
While rasterizing, the image now gets an image which is based on the provoking vertex.
Is it possible for me to introduce an interpolation mechanism to decide on the colors filled between vertices in a triangle ? Or is this hardcoded in OpenGL ?
I am a newbie in GLSL world and hence would request you to provide me with a non complicated answer.
Interpolation is hard-coded into OpenGL. If you want to do your own interpolation, you will have to provide to the fragment shader:
The barycentric coordinates for that particular fragment. That can be done by passing, for the three vertices of the triangle, vec3(1, 0, 0), vec3(0, 1, 0), and vec3(0, 0, 1).
All three uninterpolated values for your triangle's data that you wish to interpolate. This will require 3 flat input variables in your FS (or an array of 3 inputs, which is the same thing).
Of course, you'll need to match the 1, 0, 0 triangle with the particular uninterpreted value for that vertex of the triangle. And the same goes with the other two indices.
This basically requires a geometry shader, since it's very difficult for a VS to pass barycentric coordinates or to provide the right uninterpolated data. But with the barycentric coordinates of the position, and the values to be interpolated, you should be able to implement whatever interpolations scheme you like. #2 could include more than 3 values, for example.
Usual approach to needing a custom interpolation function is to use the standard interpolation for a texture coordinate, and look up whatever data you want in a texture.
Related
As far as I understand, location of a point/pixel cannot be a fraction, at least on a raster graphics system where hardwares use pixels to display images.
Then, why and how does OpenGL use fractional values for plotting pixels?
For example, how is it possible: glVertex2f(0.15f, 0.51f); ?
This command does not plot any pixels. It merely defines the location of a point in 3D space (you'll notice that there are 3 coordinates, while for a pixel on the screen you'd only need 2). This is the starting point for the OpenGL pipeline. This point then goes through a lot of transformations before it ends up on the screen.
Also, the coordinates are unitless. For example, you can say that your viewport is between 0.0f and 1.0f, then these coordinates make a lot of sense. Basically you have to think of these point in terms of mathematics, not pixels.
I would suggest some reading on how OpenGL transformations work, for example here, here or the tutorial here.
The vectors you pass into OpenGL are not viewport positions but arbitrary numbers in some vector space. Only after a chain of transformations these numbers are mapped into viewport pixel positions. With the old fixed function pipeline this could be anything that can be represented by a vector–matrix multiplication.
These days, where everything is programmable (shaders) the mapping can very well be any kind of function you can think of. For example the values you pass into glVertex (immediate mode call, but available to shaders with OpenGL-2.1) may be interpreted as polar coordinates in the vertex shader:
This is a perfectly valid OpenGL-2.1 vertex shader that interprets the vertex position to be in polar coordinates. Note that due to triangles and lines being straight edges and polar coordinates being curvilinear this gives good visual results only for points or highly tesselated primitives.
#version 110
void main() {
gl_Position =
gl_ModelViewProjectionMatrix
* vec4( gl_Vertex.y*vec2(sin(gl_Vertex.x),cos(gl_Vertex.x)) , 0, 1);
}
As you can see here the valus passed to glVertex are actually arbitrary, unitless components of vectors in some vector space. Only by applying some transformation to the viewport space these vectors gain meaning. Hence it makes no way to impose a certain value range onto the values that go into the vertex attribute.
Vertex and pixel are very different things.
It's quite possible to have all your vertices within one pixel (although in this case you probably need help with LODing).
You might want to start here...
http://www.glprogramming.com/blue/ch01.html
Specifically...
Primitives are defined by a group of one or more vertices. A vertex defines a point, an endpoint of a line, or a corner of a polygon where two edges meet. Data (consisting of vertex coordinates, colors, normals, texture coordinates, and edge flags) is associated with a vertex, and each vertex and its associated data are processed independently, in order, and in the same way.
And...
Rasterization produces a series of frame buffer addresses and associated values using a two-dimensional description of a point, line segment, or polygon. Each fragment so produced is fed into the last stage, per-fragment operations, which performs the final operations on the data before it's stored as pixels in the frame buffer.
For your example, before glVertex2f(0.15f, 0.51f) is on the screen, there are many transforms to be done. Making complex thing crudely simpler, after moving your vertex to view space (applying camera position and direction), the magic here is (1) projection matrix, and (2) viewport setting.
Internally, OpenGL "screen coordinates" are in a cube (-1, -1, -1) - (1, 1, 1), :
http://www.matrix44.net/cms/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/ogl_coord_object_space_cube.png
Projection matrix 'squeezes' the frustum in this cube (which you do in vertex shader), assuming you have perspective transform - if projection is orthogonal, the projection is just a tube, limited by near and far values (and like in both cases, scaling factors):
http://www.songho.ca/opengl/files/gl_projectionmatrix01.png
EDIT: Maybe better example here:
http://www.opengl-tutorial.org/beginners-tutorials/tutorial-3-matrices/#The_Projection_matrix
(EDIT: The Z-coordinate is used as depth value) When fragments are finally transferred to pixels on texture/framebuffer/screen, these are multiplied with viewport settings:
https://www3.ntu.edu.sg/home/ehchua/programming/opengl/images/GL_2DViewportAspectRatio.png
Hope this helps!
So when drawing a rectangle on OpenGL, if you give the corners of the rectangle texture coordinates of (0,0), (1,0), (1,1) and (0, 1), you'll get the standard rectangle.
However, if you turn it into something that's not rectangular, you'll get a weird stretching effect. Just like the following:
I saw from this page below that this can be fixed, but the solution given is only for trapezoidal values only. Also, I have to be doing this over many rectangles.
And so, the questions is, what is the proper way, and most efficient way to get the right "4D" texture coordinates for drawing stretched quads?
Implementations are allowed to decompose quads into two triangles and if you visualize this as two triangles you can immediately see why it interpolates texture coordinates the way it does. That texture mapping is correct ... for two independent triangles.
That diagonal seam coincides with the edge of two independently interpolated triangles.
Projective texturing can help as you already know, but ultimately the real problem here is simply interpolation across two triangles instead of a single quad. You will find that while modifying the Q coordinate may help with mapping a texture onto your quadrilateral, interpolating other attributes such as colors will still have serious issues.
If you have access to fragment shaders and instanced vertex arrays (probably rules out OpenGL ES), there is a full implementation of quadrilateral vertex attribute interpolation here. (You can modify the shader to work without "instanced arrays", but it will require either 4x as much data in your vertex array or a geometry shader).
Incidentally, texture coordinates in OpenGL are always "4D". It just happens that if you use something like glTexCoord2f (s, t) that r is assigned 0.0 and q is assigned 1.0. That behavior applies to all vertex attributes; vertex attributes are all 4D whether you explicitly define all 4 of the coordinates or not.
So I'm supposed to Texture Map a specific model I've loaded into a scene (with a Framebuffer and a Planar Pinhole Camera), however I'm not allowed to use OpenGL and I have no idea how to do it otherwise (we do use glDrawPixels for other functionality, but that's the only function we can use).
Is anyone here able enough to give me a run-through on how to texture map without OpenGL functionality?
I'm supposed to use these slides: https://www.cs.purdue.edu/cgvlab/courses/334/Fall_2014/Lectures/TMapping.pdf
But they make very little sense to me.
What I've gathered so far is the following:
You iterate over a model, and assign each triangle "texture coordinates" (which I'm not sure what those are), and then use "model space interpolation" (again, I don't understand what that is) to apply the texture with the right perspective.
I currently have my program doing the following:
TL;DR:
1. What is model space interpolation/how do I do it?
2. What explicitly are texture coordinates?
3. How, on a high level (in layman's terms) do I texture map a model without using OpenGL.
OK, let's start by making sure we're both on the same page about how the color interpolation works. Lines 125 through 143 set up three vectors redABC, greenABC and blueABC that are used to interpolate the colors across the triangle. They work one color component at a time, and each of the three vectors helps interpolate one color component.
By convention, s,t coordinates are in source texture space. As provided in the mesh data, they specify the position within the texture of that particular vertex of the triangle. The crucial thing to understand is that s,t coordinates need to be interpolated across the triangle just like colors.
So, what you want to do is set up two more ABC vectors: sABC and tABC, exactly duplicating the logic used to set up redABC, but instead of using the color components of each vertex, you just use the s,t coordinates of each vertex. Then for each pixel, instead of computing ssiRed etc. as unsigned int values, you compute ssis and ssit as floats, they should be in the range 0.0f through 1.0f assuming your source s,t values are well behaved.
Now that you have an interpolated s,t coordinate, multiply ssis by the texel width of the texture, and ssit by the texel height, and use those coordinates to fetch the texel. Then just put that on the screen.
Since you are not using OpenGL I assume you wrote your own software renderer to render that teapot?
A texture is simply an image. A texture coordinate is a 2D position in the texture. So (0,0) is bottom-left and (1,1) is top-right. For every vertex of your 3D model you should store a 2D position (u,v) in the texture. That means that at that vertex, you should use the colour the texture has at that point.
To know the UV texture coordinate of a pixel in between vertices you need to interpolate the texture coordinates of the vertices around it. Then you can use that UV to look up the colour in the texture.
Let there be a vertex which is part of a triangle, and of a quad.
To my best understanding, the normal of that vertex is the average of the normal of the quad and the normal of the triangle.
The triangle is drawn before the quad. When should I call glNormal and with what vector?
Should I call glNormal 2 times, each time with the same vector (the average normal vector)?
Should I call glNormal the last time the vertex is drawn, with the average normal vector?
To my best understanding, the normal of that vertex is the average of
the normal of the quad and the normal of the triangle.
Ideally, the normal vector should be orthogonal to the surface that you are rendering, on any point. However, the GL only supports rendering surfaces only as polygonal models (at least directly). So there are two principal possibilities:
The polygonal representation does exactly represent the object you want to visualize. A simple example would be a cube.
The polygonal represantation is just an (picewise linear) approximation of the surface you want to visualize. Think of smooth surfaces.
In case 1, you need one nomral per triangle (as the normal is unchaning for a flat surface defined by a triangle). However, this means that either for neighboring triangles who share an edge or corner, the normals will have to be different. From GL's point of view, each of the trianlges use different vertices, even if those vertices share the position in space. A vertex is the set of all attributes, not just the position. For the cube, that means that you will need not just 8 different vertices, but 24, so you have 3 at each corner.
In case 2, you do want to cover up the polygonal structure of the model as good as possible. One aspect of this is using smooth shading techniques. Averaging the normales of adjacent traingles at each vertex is one heuristic of doing so. In this case, neighboring primitives actually can share vertices, as the normal and the position of some corner point is the same for any triangle connected to it.
This heuristic has some drawbacks, especially if your surface does contain both smooth parts and "sharp edges" you want to preserve. There are some improved heuristics which try to detect sharp edges and splitting vertices to allow different normals for the connected triangles to not shooth such edges. But all such heuristics might fail in some cases - ideally, the normals are provided when the model is created in the first place.
The triangle is drawn before the quad. When should I call glNormal and
with what vector?
OpenGL is a state machine, meaning that things you set kepp that way until you channge them again - and setting normals is no exception. The second thing to note is that normals are a vertex attribute. So for every vertex, every arrtibute has always some value (but depending on the rest of your GL state, not all of these attributes are used when rendering).
Since you use the fixed-function GL, normals are builtin vertex attributes - so every vertex you issue in some way has some value as its normal attribute - in immediate mode rendering with glBegin()/End(), it will be the one you set with the most recent glNormal() call (or it will have the initial default value if you never called glNormal()).
So to answer you question:
YOu have to set that normal before you issue the glVertex() call for that particular vertex for the first time, and you have to re-issue that normal command for the second time drawing with "this" vertex (which technically is a different vertex anyway) if you did change it inbetween when specifying some other vertices.
To my best understanding, the normal of that vertex is the average of the normal of the quad and the normal of the triangle.
No. The normal of a plane is a vector pointing 'out of' the plane at a 90 degree angle. In OpenGL, this is used in shading calculations, and to support various effects, OpenGL lets you specify whatever normal you want instead of calculating it from the primitive. For flat lighting, the normal should be set to the mathematical definition of the normal for each primitive, while for smooth lighting, the normal should be set to the average normal of all primitives that share the vertex.
glNormal sets a value in OpenGL that is read whenever you call glVertex, and is persistent until you call glNormal again. So this code
glNormal3d(0,0,1)
glVertex3d(1,0,0)
glVertex3d(1,1,0)
glVertex3d(0,1,0)
glVertex3d(0,0,0)
specifies 4 vertices, each with a normal of (0,0,1).
Quick background of where I'm at (to make sure we're on the same page, and sanity check if I'm missing/assuming something stupid):
Goal: I want to render my scene with shadows, using deferred lighting
and shadowmaps.
Struggle: finding clear and consistent documentation regarding how to use shadow2D and sampler2DShadow.
Here's what I'm currently doing:
In the fragment shader of my final rendering pass (the one that actually calculates final frag values), I have the MVP matrices from the pass from the light's point of view, the depth texture from said pass (aka the "shadow map"), and the position/normal/color textures from my geometry buffer.
From what I understand, I need to find what UV of the shadow map the position of the current fragment corresponds to. I do that by the following:
//Bring position value at fragment (in world space) to screen space from lights POV
vec4 UVinShadowMap = (lightProjMat * lightViewMat * vec4(texture(pos_tex, UV).xyz,1.0)).xy;
//Convert screen space to 'texture space' (from -1to1 to 0to1)
UVinShadowMap = (UVinShadowMap+1)/2;
Now that I have this UV, I can get the percieved 'depth' from the light's pov with
float depFromLightPOV = texture2D(shadowMap, UVinShadowMap).r;
and compare that against the distance between the position at the current fragment and the light:
float actualDistance = distance(texture2D(pos_tex, UV).xyz, lightPos);
The problem comes from that 'depth' is stored in values 0-1, and actual distance is in world coordinates. I've tried to do that conversion manually, but couldn't get it to work. And in searching online, it looks like the way I SHOULD be doing this is with a sampler2DShadow...
So here's my question(s):
What changes do I need to make to instead use shadow2D? What does shadow2D even do? Is it just more-or-less an auto-conversion-from-depth-to-world texture? Can I use the same depth texture? Or do I need to render the depth texture a different way? What do I pass in to shadow2D? The world-space position of the fragment I want to check? Or the same UV as before?
If all these questions can be answered in a simple documentation page, I'd love if someone could just post that. But I swear I've been searching for hours and can't find anything that simply says what the heck is going on with shadow2D!
Thanks!
First of all, what version of GLSL are you using?
Beginning with GLSL 1.30, there is no special texture lookup function (name anyway) for use with sampler2DShadow. GLSL 1.30+ uses a bunch of overloads of texture (...) that are selected based on the type of sampler passed and the dimensions of the coordinates.
Second, if you do use sampler2DShadow you need to do two things differently:
Texture comparison must be enabled or you will get undefined results
GL_TEXTURE_COMPARE_MODE = GL_COMPARE_REF_TO_TEXTURE​
The coordinates you pass to texture (...) are 3D instead of 2D. The new 3rd coordinate is the depth value that you are going to compare.
Last, you should understand what texture (...) returns when using sampler2DShadow:
If this comparison passes, texture (...) will return 1.0, if it fails it will return 0.0. If you use a GL_LINEAR texture filter on your depth texture, then texture (...) will perform 4 depth comparisons using the 4 closest depth values in your depth texture and return a value somewhere in-between 1.0 and 0.0 to give an idea of the number of samples that passed/failed.
That is the proper way to do hardware anti-aliasing of shadow maps. If you tried to use a regular sampler2D with GL_LINEAR and implement the depth test yourself you would get a single averaged depth back and a boolean pass/fail result instead of the behavior described above for sampler2DShadow.
As for getting a depth value to test from a world-space position, you were on the right track (though you forgot perspective division).
There are three things you must do to generate a depth from a world-space position:
Multiply the world-space position by your (light's) projection and view matrices
Divide the resulting coordinate by its W component
Scale and bias the result (which will be in the range [-1,1]) into the range [0,1]
The final step assumes you are using the default depth range... if you have not called glDepthRange (...) then this will work.
The end result of step 3 serves as both a depth value (R) and texture coordinates (ST) for lookup into your depth map. This makes it possible to pass this value directly to texture (...). Recall that the first 2 components of the texture coordinates are the same as always, and that the 3rd is a depth value to test.