how can i get an input to the vertex shader of type uint_fast64_t?
there is not such type available in the language how can i pass it differently?
my code is this:
#version 330 core
#define CHUNK_SIZE 16
#define BLOCK_SIZE_X 0.1
#define BLOCK_SIZE_Y 0.1
#define BLOCK_SIZE_Z 0.1
// input vertex and UV coordinates, different for all executions of this shader
layout(location = 0) in uint_fast64_t vertexPosition_modelspace;
layout(location = 1) in vec2 vertexUV;
// Output data ; will be interpolated for each fragment.
out vec2 UV;
// model view projection matrix
uniform mat4 MVP;
int getAxis(uint_fast64_t p, int choice) { // axis: 0=x 1=y 2=z 3=index_x 4=index_z
switch (choice) {
case 0:
return (int)((p>>59 ) & 0xF); //extract the x axis int but i only want 4bits
case 1:
return (int)((p>>23 ) & 0xFF);//extract the y axis int but i only want 8bits
case 2:
return (int)((p>>55 ) & 0xF);//extract the z axis int but i only want 4bits
case 3:
return (int)(p & 0x807FFFFF);//extract the index_x 24bits
case 4:
return (int)((p>>32) & 0x807FFFFF);//extract the index_z 24bits
}
}
void main()
{
// assign vertex position
float x = (getAxis(vertexPosition_modelspace,0) + getAxis(vertexPosition_modelspace,3)*CHUNK_SIZE)*BLOCK_SIZE_X;
float y = getAxis(vertexPosition_modelspace,1)*BLOCK_SIZE_Y;
float z = (getAxis(vertexPosition_modelspace,2) + getAxis(vertexPosition_modelspace,3)*CHUNK_SIZE)*BLOCK_SIZE_Z;
gl_Position = MVP * vec4(x,y,z, 1.0);
// UV of the vertex. No special space for this one.
UV = vertexUV;
}
the error message i am takeing is :
i tried to put uint64_t but the same problem
Unextended GLSL for OpenGL does not have the ability to directly use 64-bit integer values. And even the fairly widely supported ARB extension that allows for the use of 64-bit integers within shaders doesn't actually allow you to use them as vertex shader attributes. That requires an NVIDIA extension supported only by... NVIDIA.
However, you can send 32-bit integers, and a 64-bit integer is just two 32-bit integers. You can put 64-bit integers into the buffer and pass them as 2 32-bit unsigned integers in your vertex attribute format:
glVertexAttribIFormat(0, 2, GL_UNSIGNED_INT, <byte_offset>);
Your shader will retrieve them as a uvec2 input:
layout(location = 0) in uvec2 vertexPosition_modelspace;
The x component of the vector will have the first 4 bytes and the y component will store the second 4 bytes. But since "first" and "second" are determined by your CPU's endian, you'll need to know whether your CPU is little endian or big endian to be able to use them. Since most desktop GL implementations are paired with little endian CPUs, we'll assume that is the case.
In this case, vertexPosition_modelspace.x contains the low 4 bytes of the 64-bit integer, and vertexPosition_modelspace.y contains the high 4 bytes.
So your code could be adjusted as follows (with some cleanup):
const vec3 BLOCK_SIZE(0.1, 0.1, 0.1);
//Get the three axes all at once.
uvec3 getAxes(in uvec2 p)
{
return uvec3(
(p.y >> 27) & 0xF),
(p.x >> 23) & 0xFF),
(p.y >> 23) & 0xF)
);
}
//Get the indices
uvec2 getIndices(in uvec2 p)
{
return p & 0x807FFFFF; //Performs component-wise bitwise &
}
void main()
{
uvec3 iPos = getAxes(vertexPosition_modelspace);
uvec2 indices = getIndices(vertexPosition_modelspace);
vec3 pos = vec3(
iPos.x + (indices.x * CHUNK_SIZE),
iPos.y,
iPos.z + (indices.x * CHUNK_SIZE) //You used index 3 in your code, so I used .x here, but I think you meant index 4.
);
pos *= BLOCK_SIZE;
...
}
I have 2 pixels in B8G8R8A8 (32) format.
Both pixels (top and bottom) has transparency (Alpha channel < 255 )
What is the way (formula) to overlay top pixel on the bottom one ?
(without using 3rd parties).
I tried to do something like this
struct FColor
{
public:
// Variables.
#if PLATFORM_LITTLE_ENDIAN
#ifdef _MSC_VER
// Win32 x86
union { struct{ uint8 B,G,R,A; }; uint32 AlignmentDummy; };
#else
// Linux x86, etc
uint8 B GCC_ALIGN(4);
uint8 G,R,A;
#endif
#else // PLATFORM_LITTLE_ENDIAN
union { struct{ uint8 A,R,G,B; }; uint32 AlignmentDummy; };
#endif
//...
};
FORCEINLINE FColor AlphaBlendColors(FColor pixel1, FColor pixel2)
{
FColor blendedColor;
//Calculate new Alpha:
uint8 newAlpha = 0;
newAlpha = pixel1.A + pixel2.A * (255 - pixel1.A);
//get FColor as uint32
uint32 colora = pixel1.DWColor();
uint32 colorb = pixel2.DWColor();
uint32 rb1 = ((0x100 - newAlpha) * (colora & 0xFF00FF)) >> 8;
uint32 rb2 = (newAlpha * (colorb & 0xFF00FF)) >> 8;
uint32 g1 = ((0x100 - newAlpha) * (colora & 0x00FF00)) >> 8;
uint32 g2 = (newAlpha * (colorb & 0x00FF00)) >> 8;
blendedColor = FColor(((rb1 | rb2) & 0xFF00FF) + ((g1 | g2) & 0x00FF00));
blendedColor.A = newAlpha;
return blendedColor;
}
But the result is far not what I want :-)
I looked for some Alpha blending formulas (I did never understand how would I calculate a new alpha of the overlay) -> perhaps I was going in a wrong direction ?
Edit:
Changing the newAlpha to newAlpha = FMath::Min(pixel1.A + pixel2.A, 255);
Actually gives a much better result, but is it right to calculate it like this ? Am I missing something here?
Working Example Based On Accepted Answer)
FORCEINLINE FColor AlphaBlendColors(FColor BottomPixel, FColor TopPixel)
{
FColor blendedColor;
//Calculate new Alpha:
float normA1 = 0.003921568627451f * (TopPixel.A);
float normA2 = 0.003921568627451f * (BottomPixel.A);
uint8 newAlpha = (uint8)((normA1 + normA2 * (1.0f - normA1)) * 255.0f);
if (newAlpha == 0)
{
return FColor(0,0,0,0);
}
//Going By Straight Alpha formula
float dstCoef = normA2 * (1.0f - normA1);
float multiplier = 255.0f / float(newAlpha);
blendedColor.R = (uint8)((TopPixel.R * normA1 + BottomPixel.R * dstCoef) * multiplier);
blendedColor.G = (uint8)((TopPixel.G * normA1 + BottomPixel.G * dstCoef) * multiplier);
blendedColor.B = (uint8)((TopPixel.B * normA1 + BottomPixel.B * dstCoef) * multiplier);
blendedColor.A = newAlpha;
return blendedColor;
}
Start by assuming that there is a third pixel below that happens to be opaque.
For the further notations, I will assume that alpha values are in [0,1].
Given: three pixels with the first one being on top, colors c_1, c_2, c_3, alpha values a_1, a_2, a_3 = 1
Then the resulting alpha value is obviously 1 and the color is
(a_1)*c_1 + (1-a_1)(*a_2)*c_2 + (1-a_1)*(1-a_2)*c_3
Now, we want to find some values c_k, a_k so that the formula above equates
(a_k)*c_k + (1-a_k)*c_3
We can solve this in two steps:
(1-a_k) = (1-a_1)*(1-a_2)
->
a_k = 1-(1-a_1)*(1-a_2)
and
(a_k)*c_k = (a_1)*c_1 + (1-a_1)(*a_2)*c_2
->
c_k = [(a_1)*c_1 + (1-a_1)(*a_2)*c_2] / a_k
Use those formulas (with a different range for your alpha values) and you get your desired color.
(Don't forget to catch a_k = 0)
edit: Explanation of the third pixel:
When you use your two pixels in any way, that is doing something that results it in being used to display something, they will be put over some other existing color that is opaque. For example, this might be the background color, but it could also be some color that is the result of applying many more transparent pixels on some background color.
What I now do to combine your two colors is to find a color that behaves just like those two colors. That is, putting it on top of some opaque color should result in the same as putting the original two colors on top of it. This is what I demand of the new color, resulting in the formula I use.
The formula is nothing than the result of applying two colors in succession on the third one.
I have the a webgl blur shader:
precision mediump float;
precision mediump int;
uniform sampler2D u_image;
uniform float blur;
uniform int u_horizontalpass; // 0 or 1 to indicate vertical or horizontal pass
uniform float sigma; // The sigma value for the gaussian function: higher value means more blur
// A good value for 9x9 is around 3 to 5
// A good value for 7x7 is around 2.5 to 4
// A good value for 5x5 is around 2 to 3.5
// ... play around with this based on what you need :)
varying vec4 v_texCoord;
const vec2 texOffset = vec2(1.0, 1.0);
// uniform vec2 texOffset;
const float PI = 3.14159265;
void main() {
vec2 p = v_texCoord.st;
float numBlurPixelsPerSide = blur / 2.0;
// Incremental Gaussian Coefficent Calculation (See GPU Gems 3 pp. 877 - 889)
vec3 incrementalGaussian;
incrementalGaussian.x = 1.0 / (sqrt(2.0 * PI) * sigma);
incrementalGaussian.y = exp(-0.5 / (sigma * sigma));
incrementalGaussian.z = incrementalGaussian.y * incrementalGaussian.y;
vec4 avgValue = vec4(0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0);
float coefficientSum = 0.0;
// Take the central sample first...
avgValue += texture2D(u_image, p) * incrementalGaussian.x;
coefficientSum += incrementalGaussian.x;
incrementalGaussian.xy *= incrementalGaussian.yz;
// Go through the remaining 8 vertical samples (4 on each side of the center)
for (float i = 1.0; i <= numBlurPixelsPerSide; i += 1.0) {
avgValue += texture2D(u_image, p - i * texOffset) * incrementalGaussian.x;
avgValue += texture2D(u_image, p + i * texOffset) * incrementalGaussian.x;
coefficientSum += 2.0 * incrementalGaussian.x;
incrementalGaussian.xy *= incrementalGaussian.yz;
}
gl_FragColor = avgValue / coefficientSum;
}
When I build, I get the following error message:
webgl-renderer.js?2eb3:137 Uncaught could not compile shader:ERROR:
0:38: 'i' : Loop index cannot be compared with non-constant expression
I have also tried to use just the uniform float blur to compare i to. Is there any way to fix this?
The problem is further detailed here: https://www.khronos.org/webgl/public-mailing-list/archives/1012/msg00063.php
The solution that I've found looking around is to only use a constant expression when comparing a loop var. This doesn't fit with what I need to do which is vary how many times I'm looping based on the blur radius.
Any thoughts on this?
This happens because on some hardware, GLSL loops are un-rolled into native GPU instructions. This means there needs to be a hard upper limit to the number of passes through the for loop, that governs how many copies of the loop's inner code will be generated. If you replace numBlurPixelsPerSide with a const float or even a #define directive, and the shader compiler can then determine the number of passes at compile time, and generate the code accordingly. But with a uniform there, the upper limit is not known at compile time.
There's an interesting wrinkle in this rule: You're allowed to break or call an early return out of a for loop, even though the max iterations must be discernible at compile time. For example, consider this tiny Mandelbrot shader. This is hardly the prettiest fractal on GLSL Sandbox, but I chose it for its small size:
precision mediump float;
uniform float time;
uniform vec2 mouse;
uniform vec2 resolution;
varying vec2 surfacePosition;
const float max_its = 100.;
float mandelbrot(vec2 z){
vec2 c = z;
for(float i=0.;i<max_its;i++){ // for loop is here.
if(dot(z,z)>4.) return i; // conditional early return here.
z = vec2(z.x*z.x-z.y*z.y,2.*z.x*z.y)+c;
}
return max_its;
}
void main( void ) {
vec2 p = surfacePosition;
gl_FragColor = vec4(mandelbrot(p)/max_its);
}
In this example, max_its is a const so the compiler knows the upper limit and can un-roll this loop if it needs to. Inside the loop, a return statement offers a way to leave the loop early for pixels that are outside of the Mandelbrot set.
You still don't want to set the max iterations too high, as this can produce a lot of GPU instructions and possibly hurt performance.
Try something like this:
const float MAX_ITERATIONS = 100.0;
// Go through the remaining 8 vertical samples (4 on each side of the center)
for (float i = 1.0; i <= MAX_ITERATIONS; i += 1.0) {
if (i >= numBlurPixelsPerSide){break;}
avgValue += texture2D(u_image, p - i * texOffset) * incrementalGaussian.x;
avgValue += texture2D(u_image, p + i * texOffset) * incrementalGaussian.x;
coefficientSum += 2.0 * incrementalGaussian.x;
incrementalGaussian.xy *= incrementalGaussian.yz;
}
Sometimes you can use my very simple solving of issue.
My fragment of the shader source code:
const int cloudPointsWidth = %s;
for ( int i = 0; i < cloudPointsWidth; i++ ) {
//TO DO something
}
You can see '%' : syntax error above. But I am replace %s to a number in my javascript code before use my shader. For example:
vertexCode = vertexCode.replace( '%s', 10 );
vertexCode is my shader source code.
Everytime if I want to change cloudPointsWidth, I am destroying my old shader and creating new shader with new cloudPointsWidth .
Hope sometimes my solving can to help you.
You can just do a for loop with large constant number and use a break.
for(int i = 0; i < 1000000; ++i)
{
// your code here
if(i >= n){
break;
}
}
I've had similar problem with image downsampling shader. The code is basically the same:
for (int dx = -2 * SCALE_FACTOR; dx < 2 * SCALE_FACTOR; dx += 2) {
for (int dy = -2 * SCALE_FACTOR; dy < 2 * SCALE_FACTOR; dy += 2) {
/* accumulate fragment's color */
}
}
What I've ended up doing is using preprocessor and creating separate shader programs for every SCALE_FACTOR used (luckily, only 4 was needed). To achieve that, a small helper function was implemented to add #define ... statements to shader code:
function insertDefines (shaderCode, defines) {
var defineString = '';
for (var define in defines) {
if (defines.hasOwnProperty(define)) {
defineString +=
'#define ' + define + ' ' + defines[define] + '\n';
}
}
var versionIdx = shaderCode.indexOf('#version');
if (versionIdx == -1) {
return defineString + shaderCode;
}
var nextLineIdx = shaderCode.indexOf('\n', versionIdx) + 1;
return shaderCode.slice(0, nextLineIdx) +
defineString +
shaderCode.slice(nextLineIdx);
}
The implementation is a bit tricky because if the code already has #version preprocessor statement in it, all other statements have to follow it.
Then I've added a check for SCALE_FACROR being defined:
#ifndef SCALE_FACTOR
# error SCALE_FACTOR is undefined
#endif
And in my javascript code I've done something like this:
var SCALE_FACTORS = [4, 8, 16, 32],
shaderCode, // the code of my shader
shaderPrograms = SCALE_FACTORS.map(function (factor) {
var codeWithDefines = insertDefines(shaderCode, { SCALE_FACTOR: factor });
/* compile shaders, link program, return */
});
I use opengl es3 on android and solve this problem by using extension above the beginning of program like this:
#extension GL_EXT_gpu_shader5 : require
I don't know whether it work on webGL, but you can try it.
Hope it can help.
You can also use template litterals to set the length of the loop
onBeforeCompile(shader) {
const array = [1,2,3,4,5];
shader.uniforms.myArray = { value: array };
let token = "#include <begin_vertex>";
const insert = `
uniform float myArray[${array.length}];
for ( int i = 0; i < ${array.length}; i++ ) {
float test = myArray[ i ];
}
`;
shader.vertexShader = shader.vertexShader.replace(token, token + insert);
}
I have the a webgl blur shader:
precision mediump float;
precision mediump int;
uniform sampler2D u_image;
uniform float blur;
uniform int u_horizontalpass; // 0 or 1 to indicate vertical or horizontal pass
uniform float sigma; // The sigma value for the gaussian function: higher value means more blur
// A good value for 9x9 is around 3 to 5
// A good value for 7x7 is around 2.5 to 4
// A good value for 5x5 is around 2 to 3.5
// ... play around with this based on what you need :)
varying vec4 v_texCoord;
const vec2 texOffset = vec2(1.0, 1.0);
// uniform vec2 texOffset;
const float PI = 3.14159265;
void main() {
vec2 p = v_texCoord.st;
float numBlurPixelsPerSide = blur / 2.0;
// Incremental Gaussian Coefficent Calculation (See GPU Gems 3 pp. 877 - 889)
vec3 incrementalGaussian;
incrementalGaussian.x = 1.0 / (sqrt(2.0 * PI) * sigma);
incrementalGaussian.y = exp(-0.5 / (sigma * sigma));
incrementalGaussian.z = incrementalGaussian.y * incrementalGaussian.y;
vec4 avgValue = vec4(0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0);
float coefficientSum = 0.0;
// Take the central sample first...
avgValue += texture2D(u_image, p) * incrementalGaussian.x;
coefficientSum += incrementalGaussian.x;
incrementalGaussian.xy *= incrementalGaussian.yz;
// Go through the remaining 8 vertical samples (4 on each side of the center)
for (float i = 1.0; i <= numBlurPixelsPerSide; i += 1.0) {
avgValue += texture2D(u_image, p - i * texOffset) * incrementalGaussian.x;
avgValue += texture2D(u_image, p + i * texOffset) * incrementalGaussian.x;
coefficientSum += 2.0 * incrementalGaussian.x;
incrementalGaussian.xy *= incrementalGaussian.yz;
}
gl_FragColor = avgValue / coefficientSum;
}
When I build, I get the following error message:
webgl-renderer.js?2eb3:137 Uncaught could not compile shader:ERROR:
0:38: 'i' : Loop index cannot be compared with non-constant expression
I have also tried to use just the uniform float blur to compare i to. Is there any way to fix this?
The problem is further detailed here: https://www.khronos.org/webgl/public-mailing-list/archives/1012/msg00063.php
The solution that I've found looking around is to only use a constant expression when comparing a loop var. This doesn't fit with what I need to do which is vary how many times I'm looping based on the blur radius.
Any thoughts on this?
This happens because on some hardware, GLSL loops are un-rolled into native GPU instructions. This means there needs to be a hard upper limit to the number of passes through the for loop, that governs how many copies of the loop's inner code will be generated. If you replace numBlurPixelsPerSide with a const float or even a #define directive, and the shader compiler can then determine the number of passes at compile time, and generate the code accordingly. But with a uniform there, the upper limit is not known at compile time.
There's an interesting wrinkle in this rule: You're allowed to break or call an early return out of a for loop, even though the max iterations must be discernible at compile time. For example, consider this tiny Mandelbrot shader. This is hardly the prettiest fractal on GLSL Sandbox, but I chose it for its small size:
precision mediump float;
uniform float time;
uniform vec2 mouse;
uniform vec2 resolution;
varying vec2 surfacePosition;
const float max_its = 100.;
float mandelbrot(vec2 z){
vec2 c = z;
for(float i=0.;i<max_its;i++){ // for loop is here.
if(dot(z,z)>4.) return i; // conditional early return here.
z = vec2(z.x*z.x-z.y*z.y,2.*z.x*z.y)+c;
}
return max_its;
}
void main( void ) {
vec2 p = surfacePosition;
gl_FragColor = vec4(mandelbrot(p)/max_its);
}
In this example, max_its is a const so the compiler knows the upper limit and can un-roll this loop if it needs to. Inside the loop, a return statement offers a way to leave the loop early for pixels that are outside of the Mandelbrot set.
You still don't want to set the max iterations too high, as this can produce a lot of GPU instructions and possibly hurt performance.
Try something like this:
const float MAX_ITERATIONS = 100.0;
// Go through the remaining 8 vertical samples (4 on each side of the center)
for (float i = 1.0; i <= MAX_ITERATIONS; i += 1.0) {
if (i >= numBlurPixelsPerSide){break;}
avgValue += texture2D(u_image, p - i * texOffset) * incrementalGaussian.x;
avgValue += texture2D(u_image, p + i * texOffset) * incrementalGaussian.x;
coefficientSum += 2.0 * incrementalGaussian.x;
incrementalGaussian.xy *= incrementalGaussian.yz;
}
Sometimes you can use my very simple solving of issue.
My fragment of the shader source code:
const int cloudPointsWidth = %s;
for ( int i = 0; i < cloudPointsWidth; i++ ) {
//TO DO something
}
You can see '%' : syntax error above. But I am replace %s to a number in my javascript code before use my shader. For example:
vertexCode = vertexCode.replace( '%s', 10 );
vertexCode is my shader source code.
Everytime if I want to change cloudPointsWidth, I am destroying my old shader and creating new shader with new cloudPointsWidth .
Hope sometimes my solving can to help you.
You can just do a for loop with large constant number and use a break.
for(int i = 0; i < 1000000; ++i)
{
// your code here
if(i >= n){
break;
}
}
I've had similar problem with image downsampling shader. The code is basically the same:
for (int dx = -2 * SCALE_FACTOR; dx < 2 * SCALE_FACTOR; dx += 2) {
for (int dy = -2 * SCALE_FACTOR; dy < 2 * SCALE_FACTOR; dy += 2) {
/* accumulate fragment's color */
}
}
What I've ended up doing is using preprocessor and creating separate shader programs for every SCALE_FACTOR used (luckily, only 4 was needed). To achieve that, a small helper function was implemented to add #define ... statements to shader code:
function insertDefines (shaderCode, defines) {
var defineString = '';
for (var define in defines) {
if (defines.hasOwnProperty(define)) {
defineString +=
'#define ' + define + ' ' + defines[define] + '\n';
}
}
var versionIdx = shaderCode.indexOf('#version');
if (versionIdx == -1) {
return defineString + shaderCode;
}
var nextLineIdx = shaderCode.indexOf('\n', versionIdx) + 1;
return shaderCode.slice(0, nextLineIdx) +
defineString +
shaderCode.slice(nextLineIdx);
}
The implementation is a bit tricky because if the code already has #version preprocessor statement in it, all other statements have to follow it.
Then I've added a check for SCALE_FACROR being defined:
#ifndef SCALE_FACTOR
# error SCALE_FACTOR is undefined
#endif
And in my javascript code I've done something like this:
var SCALE_FACTORS = [4, 8, 16, 32],
shaderCode, // the code of my shader
shaderPrograms = SCALE_FACTORS.map(function (factor) {
var codeWithDefines = insertDefines(shaderCode, { SCALE_FACTOR: factor });
/* compile shaders, link program, return */
});
I use opengl es3 on android and solve this problem by using extension above the beginning of program like this:
#extension GL_EXT_gpu_shader5 : require
I don't know whether it work on webGL, but you can try it.
Hope it can help.
You can also use template litterals to set the length of the loop
onBeforeCompile(shader) {
const array = [1,2,3,4,5];
shader.uniforms.myArray = { value: array };
let token = "#include <begin_vertex>";
const insert = `
uniform float myArray[${array.length}];
for ( int i = 0; i < ${array.length}; i++ ) {
float test = myArray[ i ];
}
`;
shader.vertexShader = shader.vertexShader.replace(token, token + insert);
}
As the GPU driver vendors don't usually bother to implement noiseX in GLSL, I'm looking for a "graphics randomization swiss army knife" utility function set, preferably optimised to use within GPU shaders. I prefer GLSL, but code any language will do for me, I'm ok with translating it on my own to GLSL.
Specifically, I'd expect:
a) Pseudo-random functions - N-dimensional, uniform distribution over [-1,1] or over [0,1], calculated from M-dimensional seed (ideally being any value, but I'm OK with having the seed restrained to, say, 0..1 for uniform result distribution). Something like:
float random (T seed);
vec2 random2 (T seed);
vec3 random3 (T seed);
vec4 random4 (T seed);
// T being either float, vec2, vec3, vec4 - ideally.
b) Continous noise like Perlin Noise - again, N-dimensional, +- uniform distribution, with constrained set of values and, well, looking good (some options to configure the appearance like Perlin levels could be useful too). I'd expect signatures like:
float noise (T coord, TT seed);
vec2 noise2 (T coord, TT seed);
// ...
I'm not very much into random number generation theory, so I'd most eagerly go for a pre-made solution, but I'd also appreciate answers like "here's a very good, efficient 1D rand(), and let me explain you how to make a good N-dimensional rand() on top of it..." .
For very simple pseudorandom-looking stuff, I use this oneliner that I found on the internet somewhere:
float rand(vec2 co){
return fract(sin(dot(co, vec2(12.9898, 78.233))) * 43758.5453);
}
You can also generate a noise texture using whatever PRNG you like, then upload this in the normal fashion and sample the values in your shader; I can dig up a code sample later if you'd like.
Also, check out this file for GLSL implementations of Perlin and Simplex noise, by Stefan Gustavson.
It occurs to me that you could use a simple integer hash function and insert the result into a float's mantissa. IIRC the GLSL spec guarantees 32-bit unsigned integers and IEEE binary32 float representation so it should be perfectly portable.
I gave this a try just now. The results are very good: it looks exactly like static with every input I tried, no visible patterns at all. In contrast the popular sin/fract snippet has fairly pronounced diagonal lines on my GPU given the same inputs.
One disadvantage is that it requires GLSL v3.30. And although it seems fast enough, I haven't empirically quantified its performance. AMD's Shader Analyzer claims 13.33 pixels per clock for the vec2 version on a HD5870. Contrast with 16 pixels per clock for the sin/fract snippet. So it is certainly a little slower.
Here's my implementation. I left it in various permutations of the idea to make it easier to derive your own functions from.
/*
static.frag
by Spatial
05 July 2013
*/
#version 330 core
uniform float time;
out vec4 fragment;
// A single iteration of Bob Jenkins' One-At-A-Time hashing algorithm.
uint hash( uint x ) {
x += ( x << 10u );
x ^= ( x >> 6u );
x += ( x << 3u );
x ^= ( x >> 11u );
x += ( x << 15u );
return x;
}
// Compound versions of the hashing algorithm I whipped together.
uint hash( uvec2 v ) { return hash( v.x ^ hash(v.y) ); }
uint hash( uvec3 v ) { return hash( v.x ^ hash(v.y) ^ hash(v.z) ); }
uint hash( uvec4 v ) { return hash( v.x ^ hash(v.y) ^ hash(v.z) ^ hash(v.w) ); }
// Construct a float with half-open range [0:1] using low 23 bits.
// All zeroes yields 0.0, all ones yields the next smallest representable value below 1.0.
float floatConstruct( uint m ) {
const uint ieeeMantissa = 0x007FFFFFu; // binary32 mantissa bitmask
const uint ieeeOne = 0x3F800000u; // 1.0 in IEEE binary32
m &= ieeeMantissa; // Keep only mantissa bits (fractional part)
m |= ieeeOne; // Add fractional part to 1.0
float f = uintBitsToFloat( m ); // Range [1:2]
return f - 1.0; // Range [0:1]
}
// Pseudo-random value in half-open range [0:1].
float random( float x ) { return floatConstruct(hash(floatBitsToUint(x))); }
float random( vec2 v ) { return floatConstruct(hash(floatBitsToUint(v))); }
float random( vec3 v ) { return floatConstruct(hash(floatBitsToUint(v))); }
float random( vec4 v ) { return floatConstruct(hash(floatBitsToUint(v))); }
void main()
{
vec3 inputs = vec3( gl_FragCoord.xy, time ); // Spatial and temporal inputs
float rand = random( inputs ); // Random per-pixel value
vec3 luma = vec3( rand ); // Expand to RGB
fragment = vec4( luma, 1.0 );
}
Screenshot:
I inspected the screenshot in an image editing program. There are 256 colours and the average value is 127, meaning the distribution is uniform and covers the expected range.
Gustavson's implementation uses a 1D texture
No it doesn't, not since 2005. It's just that people insist on downloading the old version. The version that is on the link you supplied uses only 8-bit 2D textures.
The new version by Ian McEwan of Ashima and myself does not use a texture, but runs at around half the speed on typical desktop platforms with lots of texture bandwidth. On mobile platforms, the textureless version might be faster because texturing is often a significant bottleneck.
Our actively maintained source repository is:
https://github.com/ashima/webgl-noise
A collection of both the textureless and texture-using versions of noise is here (using only 2D textures):
http://www.itn.liu.se/~stegu/simplexnoise/GLSL-noise-vs-noise.zip
If you have any specific questions, feel free to e-mail me directly (my email address can be found in the classicnoise*.glsl sources.)
Gold Noise
// Gold Noise ©2015 dcerisano#standard3d.com
// - based on the Golden Ratio
// - uniform normalized distribution
// - fastest static noise generator function (also runs at low precision)
// - use with indicated fractional seeding method.
float PHI = 1.61803398874989484820459; // Φ = Golden Ratio
float gold_noise(in vec2 xy, in float seed){
return fract(tan(distance(xy*PHI, xy)*seed)*xy.x);
}
See Gold Noise in your browser right now!
This function has improved random distribution over the current function in #appas' answer as of Sept 9, 2017:
The #appas function is also incomplete, given there is no seed supplied (uv is not a seed - same for every frame), and does not work with low precision chipsets. Gold Noise runs at low precision by default (much faster).
There is also a nice implementation described here by McEwan and #StefanGustavson that looks like Perlin noise, but "does not require any setup, i.e. not textures nor uniform arrays. Just add it to your shader source code and call it wherever you want".
That's very handy, especially given that Gustavson's earlier implementation, which #dep linked to, uses a 1D texture, which is not supported in GLSL ES (the shader language of WebGL).
After the initial posting of this question in 2010, a lot has changed in the realm of good random functions and hardware support for them.
Looking at the accepted answer from today's perspective, this algorithm is very bad in uniformity of the random numbers drawn from it. And the uniformity suffers a lot depending on the magnitude of the input values and visible artifacts/patterns will become apparent when sampling from it for e.g. ray/path tracing applications.
There have been many different functions (most of them integer hashing) being devised for this task, for different input and output dimensionality, most of which are being evaluated in the 2020 JCGT paper Hash Functions for GPU Rendering. Depending on your needs you could select a function from the list of proposed functions in that paper and simply from the accompanying Shadertoy.
One that isn't covered in this paper but that has served me very well without any noticeably patterns on any input magnitude values is also one that I want to highlight.
Other classes of algorithms use low-discrepancy sequences to draw pseudo-random numbers from, such as the Sobol squence with Owen-Nayar scrambling. Eric Heitz has done some amazing research in this area, as well with his A Low-Discrepancy Sampler that Distributes Monte Carlo Errors as a Blue Noise in Screen Space paper.
Another example of this is the (so far latest) JCGT paper Practical Hash-based Owen Scrambling, which applies Owen scrambling to a different hash function (namely Laine-Karras).
Yet other classes use algorithms that produce noise patterns with desirable frequency spectrums, such as blue noise, that is particularly "pleasing" to the eyes.
(I realize that good StackOverflow answers should provide the algorithms as source code and not as links because those can break, but there are way too many different algorithms nowadays and I intend for this answer to be a summary of known-good algorithms today)
Do use this:
highp float rand(vec2 co)
{
highp float a = 12.9898;
highp float b = 78.233;
highp float c = 43758.5453;
highp float dt= dot(co.xy ,vec2(a,b));
highp float sn= mod(dt,3.14);
return fract(sin(sn) * c);
}
Don't use this:
float rand(vec2 co){
return fract(sin(dot(co.xy ,vec2(12.9898,78.233))) * 43758.5453);
}
You can find the explanation in Improvements to the canonical one-liner GLSL rand() for OpenGL ES 2.0
hash:
Nowadays webGL2.0 is there so integers are available in (w)GLSL.
-> for quality portable hash (at similar cost than ugly float hashes) we can now use "serious" hashing techniques.
IQ implemented some in https://www.shadertoy.com/view/XlXcW4 (and more)
E.g.:
const uint k = 1103515245U; // GLIB C
//const uint k = 134775813U; // Delphi and Turbo Pascal
//const uint k = 20170906U; // Today's date (use three days ago's dateif you want a prime)
//const uint k = 1664525U; // Numerical Recipes
vec3 hash( uvec3 x )
{
x = ((x>>8U)^x.yzx)*k;
x = ((x>>8U)^x.yzx)*k;
x = ((x>>8U)^x.yzx)*k;
return vec3(x)*(1.0/float(0xffffffffU));
}
Just found this version of 3d noise for GPU, alledgedly it is the fastest one available:
#ifndef __noise_hlsl_
#define __noise_hlsl_
// hash based 3d value noise
// function taken from https://www.shadertoy.com/view/XslGRr
// Created by inigo quilez - iq/2013
// License Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
// ported from GLSL to HLSL
float hash( float n )
{
return frac(sin(n)*43758.5453);
}
float noise( float3 x )
{
// The noise function returns a value in the range -1.0f -> 1.0f
float3 p = floor(x);
float3 f = frac(x);
f = f*f*(3.0-2.0*f);
float n = p.x + p.y*57.0 + 113.0*p.z;
return lerp(lerp(lerp( hash(n+0.0), hash(n+1.0),f.x),
lerp( hash(n+57.0), hash(n+58.0),f.x),f.y),
lerp(lerp( hash(n+113.0), hash(n+114.0),f.x),
lerp( hash(n+170.0), hash(n+171.0),f.x),f.y),f.z);
}
#endif
A straight, jagged version of 1d Perlin, essentially a random lfo zigzag.
half rn(float xx){
half x0=floor(xx);
half x1=x0+1;
half v0 = frac(sin (x0*.014686)*31718.927+x0);
half v1 = frac(sin (x1*.014686)*31718.927+x1);
return (v0*(1-frac(xx))+v1*(frac(xx)))*2-1*sin(xx);
}
I also have found 1-2-3-4d perlin noise on shadertoy owner inigo quilez perlin tutorial website, and voronoi and so forth, he has full fast implementations and codes for them.
I have translated one of Ken Perlin's Java implementations into GLSL and used it in a couple projects on ShaderToy.
Below is the GLSL interpretation I did:
int b(int N, int B) { return N>>B & 1; }
int T[] = int[](0x15,0x38,0x32,0x2c,0x0d,0x13,0x07,0x2a);
int A[] = int[](0,0,0);
int b(int i, int j, int k, int B) { return T[b(i,B)<<2 | b(j,B)<<1 | b(k,B)]; }
int shuffle(int i, int j, int k) {
return b(i,j,k,0) + b(j,k,i,1) + b(k,i,j,2) + b(i,j,k,3) +
b(j,k,i,4) + b(k,i,j,5) + b(i,j,k,6) + b(j,k,i,7) ;
}
float K(int a, vec3 uvw, vec3 ijk)
{
float s = float(A[0]+A[1]+A[2])/6.0;
float x = uvw.x - float(A[0]) + s,
y = uvw.y - float(A[1]) + s,
z = uvw.z - float(A[2]) + s,
t = 0.6 - x * x - y * y - z * z;
int h = shuffle(int(ijk.x) + A[0], int(ijk.y) + A[1], int(ijk.z) + A[2]);
A[a]++;
if (t < 0.0)
return 0.0;
int b5 = h>>5 & 1, b4 = h>>4 & 1, b3 = h>>3 & 1, b2= h>>2 & 1, b = h & 3;
float p = b==1?x:b==2?y:z, q = b==1?y:b==2?z:x, r = b==1?z:b==2?x:y;
p = (b5==b3 ? -p : p); q = (b5==b4 ? -q : q); r = (b5!=(b4^b3) ? -r : r);
t *= t;
return 8.0 * t * t * (p + (b==0 ? q+r : b2==0 ? q : r));
}
float noise(float x, float y, float z)
{
float s = (x + y + z) / 3.0;
vec3 ijk = vec3(int(floor(x+s)), int(floor(y+s)), int(floor(z+s)));
s = float(ijk.x + ijk.y + ijk.z) / 6.0;
vec3 uvw = vec3(x - float(ijk.x) + s, y - float(ijk.y) + s, z - float(ijk.z) + s);
A[0] = A[1] = A[2] = 0;
int hi = uvw.x >= uvw.z ? uvw.x >= uvw.y ? 0 : 1 : uvw.y >= uvw.z ? 1 : 2;
int lo = uvw.x < uvw.z ? uvw.x < uvw.y ? 0 : 1 : uvw.y < uvw.z ? 1 : 2;
return K(hi, uvw, ijk) + K(3 - hi - lo, uvw, ijk) + K(lo, uvw, ijk) + K(0, uvw, ijk);
}
I translated it from Appendix B from Chapter 2 of Ken Perlin's Noise Hardware at this source:
https://www.csee.umbc.edu/~olano/s2002c36/ch02.pdf
Here is a public shade I did on Shader Toy that uses the posted noise function:
https://www.shadertoy.com/view/3slXzM
Some other good sources I found on the subject of noise during my research include:
https://thebookofshaders.com/11/
https://mzucker.github.io/html/perlin-noise-math-faq.html
https://rmarcus.info/blog/2018/03/04/perlin-noise.html
http://flafla2.github.io/2014/08/09/perlinnoise.html
https://mrl.nyu.edu/~perlin/noise/
https://rmarcus.info/blog/assets/perlin/perlin_paper.pdf
https://developer.nvidia.com/gpugems/GPUGems/gpugems_ch05.html
I highly recommend the book of shaders as it not only provides a great interactive explanation of noise, but other shader concepts as well.
EDIT:
Might be able to optimize the translated code by using some of the hardware-accelerated functions available in GLSL. Will update this post if I end up doing this.
lygia, a multi-language shader library
If you don't want to copy / paste the functions into your shader, you can also use lygia, a multi-language shader library. It contains a few generative functions like cnoise, fbm, noised, pnoise, random, snoise in both GLSL and HLSL. And many other awesome functions as well. For this to work it:
Relays on #include "file" which is defined by Khronos GLSL standard and suported by most engines and enviroments (like glslViewer, glsl-canvas VS Code pluging, Unity, etc. ).
Example: cnoise
Using cnoise.glsl with #include:
#ifdef GL_ES
precision mediump float;
#endif
uniform vec2 u_resolution;
uniform float u_time;
#include "lygia/generative/cnoise.glsl"
void main (void) {
vec2 st = gl_FragCoord.xy / u_resolution.xy;
vec3 color = vec3(cnoise(vec3(st * 5.0, u_time)));
gl_FragColor = vec4(color, 1.0);
}
To run this example I used glslViewer.
Please see below an example how to add white noise to the rendered texture.
The solution is to use two textures: original and pure white noise, like this one: wiki white noise
private static final String VERTEX_SHADER =
"uniform mat4 uMVPMatrix;\n" +
"uniform mat4 uMVMatrix;\n" +
"uniform mat4 uSTMatrix;\n" +
"attribute vec4 aPosition;\n" +
"attribute vec4 aTextureCoord;\n" +
"varying vec2 vTextureCoord;\n" +
"varying vec4 vInCamPosition;\n" +
"void main() {\n" +
" vTextureCoord = (uSTMatrix * aTextureCoord).xy;\n" +
" gl_Position = uMVPMatrix * aPosition;\n" +
"}\n";
private static final String FRAGMENT_SHADER =
"precision mediump float;\n" +
"uniform sampler2D sTextureUnit;\n" +
"uniform sampler2D sNoiseTextureUnit;\n" +
"uniform float uNoseFactor;\n" +
"varying vec2 vTextureCoord;\n" +
"varying vec4 vInCamPosition;\n" +
"void main() {\n" +
" gl_FragColor = texture2D(sTextureUnit, vTextureCoord);\n" +
" vec4 vRandChosenColor = texture2D(sNoiseTextureUnit, fract(vTextureCoord + uNoseFactor));\n" +
" gl_FragColor.r += (0.05 * vRandChosenColor.r);\n" +
" gl_FragColor.g += (0.05 * vRandChosenColor.g);\n" +
" gl_FragColor.b += (0.05 * vRandChosenColor.b);\n" +
"}\n";
The fragment shared contains parameter uNoiseFactor which is updated on every rendering by main application:
float noiseValue = (float)(mRand.nextInt() % 1000)/1000;
int noiseFactorUniformHandle = GLES20.glGetUniformLocation( mProgram, "sNoiseTextureUnit");
GLES20.glUniform1f(noiseFactorUniformHandle, noiseFactor);
FWIW I had the same questions and I needed it to be implemented in WebGL 1.0, so I couldn't use a few of the examples given in previous answers. I tried the Gold Noise mentioned before, but the use of PHI doesn't really click for me. (distance(xy * PHI, xy) * seed just equals length(xy) * (1.0 - PHI) * seed so I don't see how the magic of PHI should be put to work when it gets directly multiplied by seed?
Anyway, I did something similar just without PHI and instead added some variation at another place, basically I take the tan of the distance between xy and some random point lying outside of the frame to the top right and then multiply with the distance between xy and another such random point lying in the bottom left (so there is no accidental match between these points). Looks pretty decent as far as I can see. Click to generate new frames.
(function main() {
const dim = [512, 512];
twgl.setDefaults({ attribPrefix: "a_" });
const gl = twgl.getContext(document.querySelector("canvas"));
gl.canvas.width = dim[0];
gl.canvas.height = dim[1];
const bfi = twgl.primitives.createXYQuadBufferInfo(gl);
const pgi = twgl.createProgramInfo(gl, ["vs", "fs"]);
gl.canvas.onclick = (() => {
twgl.bindFramebufferInfo(gl, null);
gl.useProgram(pgi.program);
twgl.setUniforms(pgi, {
u_resolution: dim,
u_seed: Array(4).fill().map(Math.random)
});
twgl.setBuffersAndAttributes(gl, pgi, bfi);
twgl.drawBufferInfo(gl, bfi);
});
})();
<script src="https://twgljs.org/dist/4.x/twgl-full.min.js"></script>
<script id="vs" type="x-shader/x-vertex">
attribute vec4 a_position;
attribute vec2 a_texcoord;
void main() {
gl_Position = a_position;
}
</script>
<script id="fs" type="x-shader/x-fragment">
precision highp float;
uniform vec2 u_resolution;
uniform vec2 u_seed[2];
void main() {
float uni = fract(
tan(distance(
gl_FragCoord.xy,
u_resolution * (u_seed[0] + 1.0)
)) * distance(
gl_FragCoord.xy,
u_resolution * (u_seed[1] - 2.0)
)
);
gl_FragColor = vec4(uni, uni, uni, 1.0);
}
</script>
<canvas></canvas>