I'm implementing SSAO in OpenGL, following this tutorial: Jhon Chapman SSAO
Basically the technique described uses an Hemispheric kernel which is oriented along the fragment's normal. The view space z position of the sample is then compared to its screen space depth buffer value.
If the value in the depth buffer is higher, it means the sample ended up in a geometry so this fragment should be occluded.
The goal of this technique is to get rid of the classic implementation artifact where objects flat faces are greyed out.
I've have the same implementation with 2 small differencies
I'm not using a Noise texture to rotate my kernel, so I have banding artifacts, that's fine for now
I don't have access to a buffer with Per-pixel normals, so I have to compute my normal and TBN matrix only using the depth buffer.
The algorithm seems to be working fine, I can see the fragments being occluded, BUT I still have my faces greyed out...
IMO it's coming from the way I'm calculating my TBN matrix. The normals look OK but something must be wrong as my kernel doesn't seem to be properly aligned causing samples to end up in the faces.
Screenshots are with a Kernel of 8 samples and a radius of .1. the first is only the result of SSAO pass and the second one is the debug render of the generated normals.
Here is the code for the function that computes the Normal and TBN Matrix
mat3 computeTBNMatrixFromDepth(in sampler2D depthTex, in vec2 uv)
{
// Compute the normal and TBN matrix
float ld = -getLinearDepth(depthTex, uv);
vec3 x = vec3(uv.x, 0., ld);
vec3 y = vec3(0., uv.y, ld);
x = dFdx(x);
y = dFdy(y);
x = normalize(x);
y = normalize(y);
vec3 normal = normalize(cross(x, y));
return mat3(x, y, normal);
}
And the SSAO shader
#include "helper.glsl"
in vec2 vertTexcoord;
uniform sampler2D depthTex;
const int MAX_KERNEL_SIZE = 8;
uniform vec4 gKernel[MAX_KERNEL_SIZE];
// Kernel Radius in view space (meters)
const float KERNEL_RADIUS = .1;
uniform mat4 cameraProjectionMatrix;
uniform mat4 cameraProjectionMatrixInverse;
out vec4 FragColor;
void main()
{
// Get the current depth of the current pixel from the depth buffer (stored in the red channel)
float originDepth = texture(depthTex, vertTexcoord).r;
// Debug linear depth. Depth buffer is in the range [1.0];
float oLinearDepth = getLinearDepth(depthTex, vertTexcoord);
// Compute the view space position of this point from its depth value
vec4 viewport = vec4(0,0,1,1);
vec3 originPosition = getViewSpaceFromWindow(cameraProjectionMatrix, cameraProjectionMatrixInverse, viewport, vertTexcoord, originDepth);
mat3 lookAt = computeTBNMatrixFromDepth(depthTex, vertTexcoord);
vec3 normal = lookAt[2];
float occlusion = 0.;
for (int i=0; i<MAX_KERNEL_SIZE; i++)
{
// We align the Kernel Hemisphere on the fragment normal by multiplying all samples by the TBN
vec3 samplePosition = lookAt * gKernel[i].xyz;
// We want the sample position in View Space and we scale it with the kernel radius
samplePosition = originPosition + samplePosition * KERNEL_RADIUS;
// Now we need to get sample position in screen space
vec4 sampleOffset = vec4(samplePosition.xyz, 1.0);
sampleOffset = cameraProjectionMatrix * sampleOffset;
sampleOffset.xyz /= sampleOffset.w;
// Now to get the depth buffer value at the projected sample position
sampleOffset.xyz = sampleOffset.xyz * 0.5 + 0.5;
// Now can get the linear depth of the sample
float sampleOffsetLinearDepth = -getLinearDepth(depthTex, sampleOffset.xy);
// Now we need to do a range check to make sure that object
// outside of the kernel radius are not taken into account
float rangeCheck = abs(originPosition.z - sampleOffsetLinearDepth) < KERNEL_RADIUS ? 1.0 : 0.0;
// If the fragment depth is in front so it's occluding
occlusion += (sampleOffsetLinearDepth >= samplePosition.z ? 1.0 : 0.0) * rangeCheck;
}
occlusion = 1.0 - (occlusion / MAX_KERNEL_SIZE);
FragColor = vec4(vec3(occlusion), 1.0);
}
Update 1
This variation of the TBN calculation function gives the same results
mat3 computeTBNMatrixFromDepth(in sampler2D depthTex, in vec2 uv)
{
// Compute the normal and TBN matrix
float ld = -getLinearDepth(depthTex, uv);
vec3 a = vec3(uv, ld);
vec3 x = vec3(uv.x + dFdx(uv.x), uv.y, ld + dFdx(ld));
vec3 y = vec3(uv.x, uv.y + dFdy(uv.y), ld + dFdy(ld));
//x = dFdx(x);
//y = dFdy(y);
//x = normalize(x);
//y = normalize(y);
vec3 normal = normalize(cross(x - a, y - a));
vec3 first_axis = cross(normal, vec3(1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f));
vec3 second_axis = cross(first_axis, normal);
return mat3(normalize(first_axis), normalize(second_axis), normal);
}
I think the problem is probably that you are mixing coordinate systems. You are using texture coordinates in combination with the linear depth. You can imagine two vertical surfaces facing slightly to the left of the screen. Both have the same angle from the vertical plane and should thus have the same normal right?
But let's then imagine that one of these surfaces are much further from the camera. Since fFdx/fFdy functions basically tell you the difference from the neighbor pixel, the surface far away from the camera will have greater linear depth difference over one pixel, than the surface close to the camera. But the uv.x / uv.y derivative will have the same value. That means that you will get different normals depending on the distance from the camera.
The solution is to calculate the view coordinate and use the derivative of that to calculate the normal.
vec3 viewFromDepth(in sampler2D depthTex, in vec2 uv, in vec3 view)
{
float ld = -getLinearDepth(depthTex, uv);
/// I assume ld is negative for fragments in front of the camera
/// not sure how getLinearDepth is implemented
vec3 z_scaled_view = (view / view.z) * ld;
return z_scaled_view;
}
mat3 computeTBNMatrixFromDepth(in sampler2D depthTex, in vec2 uv, in vec3 view)
{
vec3 view = viewFromDepth(depthTex, uv);
vec3 view_normal = normalize(cross(dFdx(view), dFdy(view)));
vec3 first_axis = cross(view_normal, vec3(1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f));
vec3 second_axis = cross(first_axis, view_normal);
return mat3(view_normal, normalize(first_axis), normalize(second_axis));
}
Related
I have a very simple shader program that takes in a bunch of position data as GL_POINTS that generate screen-aligned squares of fragments like normal with a size depending on depth, and then in the fragment shader I wanted to draw a very simple ray-traced sphere for each one with just the shadow that is on the sphere opposite to the light. I went to this shadertoy to try to figure it out on my own. I used the sphIntersect function for ray-sphere intersection, and sphNormal to get the normal vectors on the sphere for lighting. The problem is that the spheres do not align with the squares of fragments, causing them to be cut off. This is because I am not sure how to match the projections of the spheres and the vertex positions so that they line up. Can I have an explanation of how to do this?
Here is a picture for reference.
Here are my vertex and fragment shaders for reference:
//vertex shader:
#version 460
layout(location = 0) in vec4 position; // position of each point in space
layout(location = 1) in vec4 color; //color of each point in space
layout(location = 2) uniform mat4 view_matrix; // projection * camera matrix
layout(location = 6) uniform mat4 cam_matrix; //just the camera matrix
out vec4 col; // color of vertex
out vec4 posi; // position of vertex
void main() {
vec4 p = view_matrix * vec4(position.xyz, 1.0);
gl_PointSize = clamp(1024.0 * position.w / p.z, 0.0, 4000.0);
gl_Position = p;
col = color;
posi = cam_matrix * position;
}
//fragment shader:
#version 460
in vec4 col; // color of vertex associated with this fragment
in vec4 posi; // position of the vertex associated with this fragment relative to camera
out vec4 f_color;
layout (depth_less) out float gl_FragDepth;
float sphIntersect( in vec3 ro, in vec3 rd, in vec4 sph )
{
vec3 oc = ro - sph.xyz;
float b = dot( oc, rd );
float c = dot( oc, oc ) - sph.w*sph.w;
float h = b*b - c;
if( h<0.0 ) return -1.0;
return -b - sqrt( h );
}
vec3 sphNormal( in vec3 pos, in vec4 sph )
{
return normalize(pos-sph.xyz);
}
void main() {
vec4 c = clamp(col, 0.0, 1.0);
vec2 p = ((2.0*gl_FragCoord.xy)-vec2(1920.0, 1080.0)) / 2.0;
vec3 ro = vec3(0.0, 0.0, -960.0 );
vec3 rd = normalize(vec3(p.x, p.y,960.0));
vec3 lig = normalize(vec3(0.6,0.3,0.1));
vec4 k = vec4(posi.x, posi.y, -posi.z, 2.0*posi.w);
float t = sphIntersect(ro, rd, k);
vec3 ps = ro + (t * rd);
vec3 nor = sphNormal(ps, k);
if(t < 0.0) c = vec4(1.0);
else c.xyz *= clamp(dot(nor,lig), 0.0, 1.0);
f_color = c;
gl_FragDepth = t * 0.0001;
}
Looks like you have many spheres so I would do this:
Input data
I would have VBO containing x,y,z,r describing your spheres, You will also need your view transform (uniform) that can create ray direction and start position for each fragment. Something like my vertex shader in here:
Reflection and refraction impossible without recursive ray tracing?
Create BBOX in Geometry shader and convert your POINT to QUAD or POLYGON
note that you have to account for perspective. If you are not familiar with geometry shaders see:
rendring cubics in GLSL
Where I emmit sequence of OBB from input lines...
In fragment raytrace sphere
You have to compute intersection between sphere and ray, chose the closer intersection and compute its depth and normal (for lighting). In case of no intersection you have to discard; fragment !!!
From what I can see in your images Your QUADs does not correspond to your spheres hence the clipping and also you do not discard; fragments with no intersections so you overwrite with background color already rendered stuff around last rendered spheres so you have only single sphere left in QUAD regardless of how many spheres are really there ...
To create a ray direction that matches a perspective matrix from screen space, the following ray direction formula can be used:
vec3 rd = normalize(vec3(((2.0 / screenWidth) * gl_FragCoord.xy) - vec2(aspectRatio, 1.0), -proj_matrix[1][1]));
The value of 2.0 / screenWidth can be pre-computed or the opengl built-in uniform structs can be used.
To get a bounding box or other shape for your spheres, it is very important to use camera-facing shapes, and not camera-plane-facing shapes. Use the following process where position is the incoming VBO position data, and the w-component of position is the radius:
vec4 p = vec4((cam_matrix * vec4(position.xyz, 1.0)).xyz, position.w);
o.vpos = p;
float l2 = dot(p.xyz, p.xyz);
float r2 = p.w * p.w;
float k = 1.0 - (r2/l2);
float radius = p.w * sqrt(k);
if(l2 < r2) {
p = vec4(0.0, 0.0, -p.w * 0.49, p.w);
radius = p.w;
k = 0.0;
}
vec3 hx = radius * normalize(vec3(-p.z, 0.0, p.x));
vec3 hy = radius * normalize(vec3(-p.x * p.y, p.z * p.z + p.x * p.x, -p.z * p.y));
p.xyz *= k;
Then use hx and hy as basis vectors for any 2D shape that you want the billboard to be shaped like for the vertices. Don't forget later to multiply each vertex by a perspective matrix to get the final position of each vertex. Here is a visualization of the billboarding on desmos using a hexagon shape: https://www.desmos.com/calculator/yeeew6tqwx
I'm implementing directional shadow mapping in deferred shading.
First, I render a depth map from light view (orthogonal projection).
Result:
I intend to do VSM so above buffer is R32G32 storing depth and depth * depth.
Then for a full-screen shading pass for shadow (after a lighting pass), I write the following pixel shader:
#version 330
in vec2 texCoord; // screen coordinate
out vec3 fragColor; // output color on the screen
uniform mat4 lightViewProjMat; // lightView * lightProjection (ortho)
uniform sampler2D sceneTexture; // lit scene with one directional light
uniform sampler2D shadowMapTexture;
uniform sampler2D scenePosTexture; // store fragment's 3D position
void main() {
vec3 fragPos = texture(scenePosTexture, texCoord).xyz; // get 3D position of pixel
vec4 fragPosLightSpace = lightViewProjMat * vec4(fragPos, 1.0); // project it to light-space view: lightView * lightProjection
// projective texture mapping
vec3 coord = fragPosLightSpace.xyz / fragPosLightSpace.w;
coord = coord * 0.5 + 0.5;
float lightViewDepth; // depth value in the depth buffer - the maximum depth that light can see
float currentDepth; // depth of screen pixel, maybe not visible to the light, that's how shadow mapping works
vec2 moments; // depth and depth * depth for later variance shadow mapping
moments = texture(shadowMapTexture, coord.xy).xy;
lightViewDepth = moments.x;
currentDepth = fragPosLightSpace.z;
float lit_factor = 0;
if (currentDepth <= lightViewDepth)
lit_factor = 1; // pixel is visible to the light
else
lit_factor = 0; // the light doesn't see this pixel
// I don't do VSM yet, just want to see black or full-color pixels
fragColor = texture(sceneTexture, texCoord).rgb * lit_factor;
}
The rendered result is a black screen, but if I hard coded the lit_factor to be 1, result is:
Basically that's how the sceneTexture looks like.
So I think either my depth value is wrong, which is unlikely, or my projection (light space projection in above shader / projective texture mapping) is wrong. Could you validate it for me?
My shadow map generation code is:
// vertex shader
#version 330 compatibility
uniform mat4 lightViewMat; // lightView
uniform mat4 lightViewProjMat; // lightView * lightProj
in vec3 in_vertex;
out float depth;
void main() {
vec4 vert = vec4(in_vertex, 1.0);
depth = (lightViewMat * vert).z / (500 * 0.2); // 500 is far value, this line tunes the depth precision
gl_Position = lightViewProjMat * vert;
}
// pixel shader
#version 330
in float depth;
out vec2 out_depth;
void main() {
out_depth = vec2(depth, depth * depth);
}
The z component of the fragment shader built in variable gl_FragCoord contains the depth value in range [0.0, 1.0]. This is the value which you shoud store to the depth map:
out_depth = vec2(gl_FragCoord.z, depth * depth);
After the calculation
vec3 fragPos = texture(scenePosTexture, texCoord).xyz; // get 3D position of pixel
vec4 fragPosLightSpace = lightViewProjMat * vec4(fragPos, 1.0); // project it to light-space view: lightView * lightProjection
vec3 ndc_coord = fragPosLightSpace.xyz / fragPosLightSpace.w;
the variable ndc_coord contains a normalized device coordinate, where all components are in range [-1.0, 1.0].
The z component of the normalized device coordiante can be conveted to the depth value (if the depth range is [0.0, 1.0]), by
float currentDepth = ndc_coord.z * 0.5 + 0.5;
This value can be compared to the value from the depth map, because currentDepth and lightViewDepth are calcualted by the same view matrix and projection matrix:
moments = texture(shadowMapTexture, coord.xy).xy;
lightViewDepth = moments.x;
if (currentDepth <= lightViewDepth)
lit_factor = 1; // pixel is visible to the light
else
lit_factor = 0; // the light doesn't see this pixel
This is the depth you store in the shadow map:
depth = (lightViewMat * vert).z / (500 * 0.2);
This is the depth you compare the read back value to:
vec4 fragPosLightSpace = lightViewProjMat * vec4(fragPos, 1.0);
currentDepth = fragPosLightSpace.z;
If fragPos is in world space then I assume lightViewMat * vert == fragPos. You are compressing depth by dividing by 500 * 0.2, but that does not equal to fragPosLightSpace.z.
Hint: Write out the value of currentDepth in one channel and the value from the shadow map in another channel, you can then compare them visually or in RenderDoc or similar.
Initial situation
I want to visualize simulation data in openGL.
My data consists of particle positions (x, y, z) where each particle has some properties (like density, temperature, ...) which will be used for coloring. Those (SPH) particles (100k to several millions), grouped together, actually represent planets, in case you wonder. I want to render those particles as small 3D spheres and add ambient, diffuse and specular lighting.
Status quo and questions
In MY case: In which coordinate frame do I do the lightning calculations? Which way is the "best" to pass the various components through the pipeline?
I saw that it is common to do it in view space which is also very intuitive. However: The normals at the different fragment positions are calculated in the fragment shader in clip space coordinates (see appended fragment shader). Can I actually convert them "back" into view space to do the lightning calculations in view space for all the fragments? Would there be any advantage compared to doing it in clip space?
It would be easier to get the normals in view space if I would use meshes for each sphere but I think with several million particles this would decrease performance drastically, so better do it with sphere intersection, would you agree?
PS: I don't need a model matrix since all the particles are already in place.
//VERTEX SHADER
#version 330 core
layout (location = 0) in vec3 position;
layout (location = 2) in float density;
uniform float radius;
uniform vec3 lightPos;
uniform vec3 viewPos;
out vec4 lightDir;
out vec4 viewDir;
out vec4 viewPosition;
out vec4 posClip;
out float vertexColor;
// transformation matrices
uniform mat4 model;
uniform mat4 view;
uniform mat4 projection;
void main()
{
lightDir = projection * view * vec4(lightPos - position, 1.0f);
viewDir = projection * view * vec4(viewPos - position, 1.0f);
viewPosition = projection * view * vec4(lightPos, 1.0f);
posClip = projection * view * vec4(position, 1.0f);
gl_Position = posClip;
gl_PointSize = radius;
vertexColor = density;
}
I know that projective divion happens for the gl_Position variable, does that actually happen to ALL vec4's which are passed from the vertex to the fragment shader? If not, maybe the calculations in the fragment shader would be wrong?
And the fragment shader where the normals and diffuse/specular lightning calculations in clip space:
//FRAGMENT SHADER
#version 330 core
in float vertexColor;
in vec4 lightDir;
in vec4 viewDir;
in vec4 posClip;
in vec4 viewPosition;
uniform vec3 lightColor;
vec4 colormap(float x); // returns vec4(r, g, b, a)
out vec4 vFragColor;
void main(void)
{
// AMBIENT LIGHT
float ambientStrength = 0.0;
vec3 ambient = ambientStrength * lightColor;
// Normal calculation done in clip space (first from texture (gl_PointCoord 0 to 1) coord to NDC( -1 to 1))
vec3 normal;
normal.xy = gl_PointCoord * 2.0 - vec2(1.0); // transform from 0->1 point primitive coords to NDC -1->1
float mag = dot(normal.xy, normal.xy); // sqrt(x=1) = sqrt(x)
if (mag > 1.0) // discard fragments outside sphere
discard;
normal.z = sqrt(1.0 - mag); // because x^2 + y^2 + z^2 = 1
// DIFFUSE LIGHT
float diff = max(0.0, dot(vec3(lightDir), normal));
vec3 diffuse = diff * lightColor;
// SPECULAR LIGHT
float specularStrength = 0.1;
vec3 viewDir = normalize(vec3(viewPosition) - vec3(posClip));
vec3 reflectDir = reflect(-vec3(lightDir), normal);
float shininess = 64;
float spec = pow(max(dot(vec3(viewDir), vec3(reflectDir)), 0.0), shininess);
vec3 specular = specularStrength * spec * lightColor;
vFragColor = colormap(vertexColor / 8) * vec4(ambient + diffuse + specular, 1);
}
Now this actually "kind of" works but i have the feeling that also the sides of the sphere which do NOT face the light source are being illuminated, which shouldn't happen. How can I fix this?
Some weird effect: In this moment the light source is actually BEHIND the left planet (it just peaks out a little bit at the top left), bit still there are diffuse and specular effects going on. This side should be actually pretty dark! =(
Also at this moment I get some glError: 1282 error in the fragment shader and I don't know where it comes from since the shader program actually compiles and runs, any suggestions? :)
The things that you are drawing aren't actually spheres. They just look like them from afar. This is absolutely ok if you are fine with that. If you need geometrically correct spheres (with correct sizes and with a correct projection), you need to do proper raycasting. This seems to be a comprehensive guide on this topic.
1. What coordinate system?
In the end, it is up to you. The coordinate system just needs to fulfill some requirements. It must be angle-preserving (because lighting is all about angles). And if you need distance-based attenuation, it should also be distance-preserving. The world and the view coordinate systems usually fulfill these requirements. Clip space is not suited for lighting calculations as neither angles nor distances are preserved. Furthermore, gl_PointCoord is in none of the usual coordinate systems. It is its own coordinate system and you should only use it together with other coordinate systems if you know their relation.
2. Meshes or what?
Meshes are absolutely not suited to render spheres. As mentioned above, raycasting or some screen-space approximation are better choices. Here is an example shader that I used in my projects:
#version 330
out vec4 result;
in fData
{
vec4 toPixel; //fragment coordinate in particle coordinates
vec4 cam; //camera position in particle coordinates
vec4 color; //sphere color
float radius; //sphere radius
} frag;
uniform mat4 p; //projection matrix
void main(void)
{
vec3 v = frag.toPixel.xyz - frag.cam.xyz;
vec3 e = frag.cam.xyz;
float ev = dot(e, v);
float vv = dot(v, v);
float ee = dot(e, e);
float rr = frag.radius * frag.radius;
float radicand = ev * ev - vv * (ee - rr);
if(radicand < 0)
discard;
float rt = sqrt(radicand);
float lambda = max(0, (-ev - rt) / vv); //first intersection on the ray
float lambda2 = (-ev + rt) / vv; //second intersection on the ray
if(lambda2 < lambda) //if the first intersection is behind the camera
discard;
vec3 hit = lambda * v; //intersection point
vec3 normal = (frag.cam.xyz + hit) / frag.radius;
vec4 proj = p * vec4(hit, 1); //intersection point in clip space
gl_FragDepth = ((gl_DepthRange.diff * proj.z / proj.w) + gl_DepthRange.near + gl_DepthRange.far) / 2.0;
vec3 vNormalized = -normalize(v);
float nDotL = dot(vNormalized, normal);
vec3 c = frag.color.rgb * nDotL + vec3(0.5, 0.5, 0.5) * pow(nDotL, 120);
result = vec4(c, frag.color.a);
}
3. Perspective division
Perspective division is not applied to your attributes. The GPU does perspective division on the data that you pass via gl_Position on the way to transforming them to screen space. But you will never actually see this perspective-divided position unless you do it yourself.
4. Light in the dark
This might be the result of you mixing different coordinate systems or doing lighting calculations in clip space. Btw, the specular part is usually not multiplied by the material color. This is light that gets reflected directly at the surface. It does not penetrate the surface (which would absorb some colors depending on the material). That's why those highlights are usually white (or whatever light color you have), even on black objects.
I have been working on projecting decals on to anything that the decals bounding box encapsulates. After reading and trying numerous code snippets (usually in HLSL) I have a some what working method in GLSL for projecting the decals.
Let me start with trying to explain what I'm doing and how this works (so far).
The code below is now fixed and works!
This all is while in the perspective view mode.
I send 2 uniforms to the fragment shader "tr" and "bl". These are the 2 corners of the bounding box. I can and will replace these with hard coded sizes because they are the size of the decals original bounding box. tr = vec3(.5, .5, .5) and br = vec3(-.5, -.5, -.5). I'd prefer to find a way to do the position tests in the decals transformed state. (more about this at the end).
Adding this for clarity. The vertex emitted from the vertex program is the bounding box multiplied by the decals matrix and than by the model view projection matrix.. I use this for the next step:
With that vertex, I get the depth value from the depth texture and with it, calculate the position in world space using the inverse of the projection matrix.
Next, I translate this position using the Inverse of the Decals matrix. (The matrix that scales, rotates and translates the 1,1,1 cube to its world location. I thought that by using the inverse of the decals transform matrix, the correct size and rotation of the screen point would be handled correctly but it is not.
Vertex Program:
//Decals color pass.
#version 330 compatibility
out mat4 matPrjInv;
out vec4 positionSS;
out vec4 positionWS;
out mat4 invd_mat;
uniform mat4 decal_matrix;
void main(void)
{
gl_Position = decal_matrix * gl_Vertex;
gl_Position = gl_ModelViewProjectionMatrix * gl_Position;
positionWS = (decal_matrix * gl_Vertex);;
positionSS = gl_Position;
matPrjInv = inverse(gl_ModelViewProjectionMatrix);
invd_mat = inverse(decal_matrix);
}
Fragment Program:
#version 330 compatibility
layout (location = 0) out vec4 gPosition;
layout (location = 1) out vec4 gNormal;
layout (location = 2) out vec4 gColor;
uniform sampler2D depthMap;
uniform sampler2D colorMap;
uniform sampler2D normalMap;
uniform mat4 matrix;
uniform vec3 tr;
uniform vec3 bl;
in vec2 TexCoords;
in vec4 positionSS; // screen space
in vec4 positionWS; // world space
in mat4 invd_mat; // inverse decal matrix
in mat4 matPrjInv; // inverse projection matrix
void clip(vec3 v){
if (v.x > tr.x || v.x < bl.x ) { discard; }
if (v.y > tr.y || v.y < bl.y ) { discard; }
if (v.z > tr.z || v.z < bl.z ) { discard; }
}
vec2 postProjToScreen(vec4 position)
{
vec2 screenPos = position.xy / position.w;
return 0.5 * (vec2(screenPos.x, screenPos.y) + 1);
}
void main(){
// Calculate UVs
vec2 UV = postProjToScreen(positionSS);
// sample the Depth from the Depthsampler
float Depth = texture2D(depthMap, UV).x * 2.0 - 1.0;
// Calculate Worldposition by recreating it out of the coordinates and depth-sample
vec4 ScreenPosition;
ScreenPosition.xy = UV * 2.0 - 1.0;
ScreenPosition.z = (Depth);
ScreenPosition.w = 1.0f;
// Transform position from screen space to world space
vec4 WorldPosition = matPrjInv * ScreenPosition ;
WorldPosition.xyz /= WorldPosition.w;
WorldPosition.w = 1.0f;
// transform to decal original position and size.
// 1 x 1 x 1
WorldPosition = invd_mat * WorldPosition;
clip (WorldPosition.xyz);
// Get UV for textures;
WorldPosition.xy += 0.5;
WorldPosition.y *= -1.0;
vec4 bump = texture2D(normalMap, WorldPosition.xy);
gColor = texture2D(colorMap, WorldPosition.xy);
//Going to have to do decals in 2 passes..
//Blend doesn't work with GBUFFER.
//Lots more to sort out.
gNormal.xyz = bump;
gPosition = positionWS;
}
And here are a couple of Images showing whats wrong.
What I get for the projection:
And this is the actual size of the decals.. Much larger than what my shader is creating!
I have tried creating a new matrix using the decals and the projection matrix to construct a sort of "lookat" matrix and translate the screen position in to the decals post transformed state.. I have not been able to get this working. Some where I am missing something but where? I thought that translating using the inverse of the decals matrix would deal with the transform and put the screen position in the proper transformed state. Ideas?
Updated the code for the texture UVs.. You may have to fiddle with the y and x depending on if your texture is flipped on x or y. I also fixed the clip sub so it works correctly. As it is, this code now works. I will update this more if needed so others don't have to go through the pain I did to get it working.
Some issues to resolve are decals laying over each other. The one on top over writes the one below. I think I will have to accumulated the colors and normals in to the default FBO and then blend(Add) them to the GBUFFER textures before or during the lighting pass. Adding more screen size textures is not a great idea so I will need to be creative and recycle any textures I can.
I found the solution to decals overlaying each other.
Turn OFF depth masking while drawing the decals and turn int back on afterwards:
glDepthMask(GL_FALSE)
OK.. I'm so excited. I found the issue.
I updated the code above again.
I had a mistake in what I was sending the shader for tr and bl:
Here is the change to clip:
void clip(vec3 v){
if (v.x > tr.x || v.x < bl.x ) { discard; }
if (v.y > tr.y || v.y < bl.y ) { discard; }
if (v.z > tr.z || v.z < bl.z ) { discard; }
}
I'm following the tutorial by John Chapman (http://john-chapman-graphics.blogspot.nl/2013/01/ssao-tutorial.html) to implement SSAO in a deferred renderer. The input buffers to the SSAO shaders are:
World-space positions with linearized depth as w-component.
World-space normal vectors
Noise 4x4 texture
I'll first list the complete shader and then briefly walk through the steps:
#version 330 core
in VS_OUT {
vec2 TexCoords;
} fs_in;
uniform sampler2D texPosDepth;
uniform sampler2D texNormalSpec;
uniform sampler2D texNoise;
uniform vec3 samples[64];
uniform mat4 projection;
uniform mat4 view;
uniform mat3 viewNormal; // transpose(inverse(mat3(view)))
const vec2 noiseScale = vec2(800.0f/4.0f, 600.0f/4.0f);
const float radius = 5.0;
void main( void )
{
float linearDepth = texture(texPosDepth, fs_in.TexCoords).w;
// Fragment's view space position and normal
vec3 fragPos_World = texture(texPosDepth, fs_in.TexCoords).xyz;
vec3 origin = vec3(view * vec4(fragPos_World, 1.0));
vec3 normal = texture(texNormalSpec, fs_in.TexCoords).xyz;
normal = normalize(normal * 2.0 - 1.0);
normal = normalize(viewNormal * normal); // Normal from world to view-space
// Use change-of-basis matrix to reorient sample kernel around origin's normal
vec3 rvec = texture(texNoise, fs_in.TexCoords * noiseScale).xyz;
vec3 tangent = normalize(rvec - normal * dot(rvec, normal));
vec3 bitangent = cross(normal, tangent);
mat3 tbn = mat3(tangent, bitangent, normal);
// Loop through the sample kernel
float occlusion = 0.0;
for(int i = 0; i < 64; ++i)
{
// get sample position
vec3 sample = tbn * samples[i]; // From tangent to view-space
sample = sample * radius + origin;
// project sample position (to sample texture) (to get position on screen/texture)
vec4 offset = vec4(sample, 1.0);
offset = projection * offset;
offset.xy /= offset.w;
offset.xy = offset.xy * 0.5 + 0.5;
// get sample depth
float sampleDepth = texture(texPosDepth, offset.xy).w;
// range check & accumulate
// float rangeCheck = abs(origin.z - sampleDepth) < radius ? 1.0 : 0.0;
occlusion += (sampleDepth <= sample.z ? 1.0 : 0.0);
}
occlusion = 1.0 - (occlusion / 64.0f);
gl_FragColor = vec4(vec3(occlusion), 1.0);
}
The result is however not pleasing. The occlusion buffer is mostly all white and doesn't show any occlusion. However, if I move really close to an object I can see some weird noise-like results as you can see below:
This is obviously not correct. I've done a fair share of debugging and believe all the relevant variables are correctly passed around (they all visualize as colors). I do the calculations in view-space.
I'll briefly walk through the steps (and choices) I've taken in case any of you figure something goes wrong in one of the steps.
view-space positions/normals
John Chapman retrieves the view-space position using a view ray and a linearized depth value. Since I use a deferred renderer that already has the world-space positions per fragment I simply take those and multiply them with the view matrix to get them to view-space.
I take a similar approach for the normal vectors. I take the world-space normal vectors from a buffer texture, transform them to [-1,1] range and multiply them with transpose(inverse(mat3(..))) of view matrix.
The view-space position and normals are visualized as below:
This looks correct to me.
Orient hemisphere around normal
The steps to create the tbn matrix are the same as described in John Chapman's tutorial. I create the noise texture as follows:
std::vector<glm::vec3> ssaoNoise;
for (GLuint i = 0; i < noise_size; i++)
{
glm::vec3 noise(randomFloats(generator) * 2.0 - 1.0, randomFloats(generator) * 2.0 - 1.0, 0.0f);
noise = glm::normalize(noise);
ssaoNoise.push_back(noise);
}
...
glTexImage2D(GL_TEXTURE_2D, 0, GL_RGB16F, 4, 4, 0, GL_RGB, GL_FLOAT, &ssaoNoise[0]);
I can visualize the noise in the fragment shader so that seems to work.
sample depths
I transform all samples from tangent to view-space (samples are random between [-1,1] on xy axis and [0,1] on z-axis and translate them to fragment's current view-space position (origin).
I then sample from linearized depth buffer (which I visualize below when looking close to an object):
and finally compare sampled depth values to current fragment's depth value and add occlusion values. Note that I do not perform a range-check since I don't believe that is the cause of this behavior and I'd rather keep it as minimal as possible for now.
I don't know what is causing this behavior. I believe it is somewhere in sampling the depth values. As far as I can tell I am working in the right coordinate system, linearized depth values are in view-space as well and all variables are set somewhat properly.