Taking the standard opengl 4.0+ functions & specifications into consideration; i've seen that geometries and shapes can be created in either two ways:
making use of VAO & VBO s.
using shader programs.
which one is the standard way of creating shapes?? are they consistent with each other? or they are two different ways for creating geometry and shapes?
Geometry is loaded into the GPU with VAO & VBO.
Geometry shaders produce new geometry based on uploaded. Use them to make special effects like particles, shadows(Shadow Volumes) in more efficient way.
tessellation shaders serve to subdivide geometry for some effects like displacement mapping.
I strongly (like really strongly) recommend you reading this http://fgiesen.wordpress.com/2011/07/09/a-trip-through-the-graphics-pipeline-2011-index/
VAOs and VBOs how about what geometry to draw (specifying per-vertex data). Shader programs are about how to draw them (which program gets applied to each provided vertex, each fragment and so on).
Let's lay out the full facts.
Shaders need input. Without input that changes, every shader invocation will produce exactly the same values. That's how shaders work. When you issue a draw call, a number of shader invocations are launched. The only variables that will change from invocation to invocation within this draw call are in variables. So unless you use some sort of input, every shader will produce the same outputs.
However, that doesn't mean you absolutely need a VAO that actually contains things. It is perfectly legal (though there are some drivers that don't support it) to render with a VAO that doesn't have any attributes enabled (though you have to use array rendering, not indexed rendering). In which case, all user-defined inputs to the vertex shader (if any) will be filled in with context state, which will be constant.
The vertex shader does have some other, built-in per-vertex inputs generated by the system. Namely gl_VertexID. This is the index used by OpenGL to uniquely identify this particular vertex. It will be different for every vertex.
So you could, for example, fetch geometry data yourself based on this index through uniform buffers, buffer textures, or some other mechanism. Or you can procedurally generate vertex data based on the index. Or something else. You could pass that data along to tessellation shaders for them to tessellate the generated data. Or to geometry shaders to do whatever it is you want with those. However you want to turn that index into real data is up to you.
Here's an example from my tutorial series that generates vertex data from nothing more than an index.
i've seen that geometries and shapes can be created in either two ways:
Not either. In modern OpenGL-4 you need both data and programs.
VBOs and VAOs do contain the raw geometry data. Shaders are the programs (usually executed on the GPU) that turn the raw data into pixels on the screen.
Vertex shaders can be used to displace vertices, or to generate them from a builtin formula and the vertex index, which is available as a built in attribute in later open gl versions.
The difference between vertex and geometry shaders is that vertex shader is a 1:1 mapping, while geometry shader can create more vertices -- can be utilized in automatic Level of Detail generation for e.g. NURBS or perlin noise based terrains etc.
Related
Suppose I want to render many different models, each with a different transformation matrix I want to be applied to their vertices. As far as I understand, the naive approach is to specify a matrix uniform in the vertex shader, the value of which is updated for each mesh during rendering.
It's obvious to me that this is a bad idea, due to the expense of many uniform updates and draw calls. So, what is the most efficient way to achieve this in modern OpenGL?
I've genuinely tried to find a straight, clear answer to this question. Most answers I find vaguely mention UBOs, or instance drawing (which afaik won't work unless you are drawing instances of the same mesh many times, which is not my goal).
With OpenGL 4.6 or with ARB_shader_draw_parameters, each draw in a multi-draw rendering command (functions of the form glMultiDraw*) is assigned a draw index from 0 to the number of draw calls specified by that function. This index is provided to the Vertex Shader via the gl_DrawID input value. You can then use this index to fetch a matrix from any number of constructs: UBOs, SSBOs, buffer textures, etc.
This works for multi-draw indirect rendering as well. So in theory, you can have a compute shader operation generate a bunch of rendering commands, then render your entire scene with a single draw call (assuming that all of your objects live in the same vertex buffers and can use the same shader and other state). Or at the very least, a large portion of the scene.
Furthermore, this index is considered dynamically uniform, so you can also use it (or values derived from it and other dynamically uniform values) to index into arrays of textures, fetch a texture from an array of bindless textures, or the like.
EDIT:
My question was unclear at first, I'll try to rephrase it:
How do I use different shaders to do different rendering operations on the same mesh polygons? For example, I want to add lighting using one shader and add fog using another shader. I need to use the color interpolated from the first shader in the calculation of the second shader, but I don't know how to do it if I can't (or rather not supposed to) pass around the color buffer between shaders.
Also (and that was where my question started), I need the same world-view-projection calculations for both shaders, so am I supposed to calculate it in every shader seperatly? Am I supposed to use one big shader for all my rendering operations?
Original question:
Say I have two different shader programs. The first one calculates the vertex positions in the vertex shader and does some operations in the fragment shader.
Let's say I want to use the fragment shader to do different calculations, but I still want to use the same vertex positions calculated by the first vertex shader. Do I have to calculate the vertex positions again or is there a way to share state between different shader programs?
you got more options:
multi pass
this one usually render the geometry into depth and "color" buffer first and then in next passes uses that as input textures for rendering single rectangle covering whole screen/view. Deferred shading is an example of this but there are many other implementations of effects that are not Deferred shading related. Here an example of multi pass:
How can I render an 'atmosphere' over a rendering of the Earth in Three.js?
In first pass the planets and stars and stuff is rendered, in second the atmosphere is added.
You can combine the passes either by blending or direct rendering. The direct rendering requires that you render to texture each pass and render in the last one. Blending is changing the color of the output in each pass.
single pass
what you describe is more like you should encode the different shaders as a functions for single fragment shader... Yes you can combine more shaders into single one if they are compatible and combine their results to final output color.
Big shader is a performance hit but I think it would be still faster than having multiple passes doing the same.
Take a look at this example:
Normal mapping gone horribly wrong
this one computes enviromental reflection, lighting, geometry color and combines them together to single output color.
Exotic shaders
There are also exotic shaders that go around the pipeline limitations like this one:
Reflection and refraction impossible without recursive ray tracing?
Which are used for stuff that is believed to be not possible to implement in GL/GLSL pipeline. Anyway If the limitations are too binding you can still use compute shader...
As far as I understand, the color of a pixel is determined by the fragment shader. Why do we need a vertex shader then? Is there anything a fragment shader cannot do (or cannot easily do) but a vertex shader can do (easily)?
But I still can't quite understand why it is named a "shader".
Because that's what programs executed as part of the rendering process are called. The Renderman interface specification was one of the first programmable rendering processes, and they called all of their programmable elements "shaders", even though they didn't all compute colors.
And therefore, "shader" has become the term used for describing any such program.
Vertex shaders convert vertex data, creating a 1:1 mapping from input vertices to output vertices. Fragment shaders operate on fragments. An FS invocation has no control over where it will be executed. They are generated in the location that the rasterizer says they go, and the FS has no way to affect this.
By contrast, a vertex shader has complete control over where the vertices will go.
I am trying to learn tessellation shaders in openGL 4.1. I understood most of the things. I have one question.
What is gl_InvocationID?
Can any body please explain in some easy way?
gl_InvocationID has two current uses, but it represents the same concept in both.
In Geometry Shaders, you can have GL run your geometry shader multiple times per-primitive. This is useful in scenarios where you want to draw the same thing from several perspectives. Each time the shader runs on the same set of data, gl_InvocationID is incremented.
The common theme between Geometry and Tessellation Shaders is that each invocation shares the same input data. A Tessellation Control Shader can read every single vertex in the input patch primitive, and you actually need gl_InvocationID to make sense of which data point you are supposed to be processing.
This is why you generally see Tessellation Control Shaders written something like this:
gl_out [gl_InvocationID].gl_Position = gl_in [gl_InvocationID].gl_Position;
gl_in and gl_out are potentially very large arrays in Tessellation Control Shaders (equal in size to GL_PATCH_VERTICES), and you have to know which vertex you are interested in.
Also, keep in mind that you are not allowed to write to any index other than gl_out [gl_InvocationID] from a Tessellation Control Shader. That property keeps invoking Tessellation Control Shaders in parallel sane (it avoids order dependencies and prevents overwriting data that a different invocation already wrote).
I have a list of vertices and their arrangement into triangles as well as the per-triangle normalized normal vectors.
Ideally, I'd like to do as little work as possible in somehow converting the (triangle,normal) pairs into (vertex,vertex_normal) pairs that I can stick into my VAO. Is there a way for OpenGL to deal with the face normals directly? Or do I have to keep track of each face a given vertex is involved in (which more or less happens already when I calculate the index buffers) and then manually calculate the averaged normal at the vertex?
Also, is there a way to skip per-vertex normal calculation altogether and just find a way to inform the fragment shader of the face-normal directly?
Edit: I'm using something that should be portable to ES devices so the fixed-function stuff is unusable
I can't necessarily speak as to the latest full-fat OpenGL specifications but certainly in ES you're going to have to do the work yourself.
Although the normal was modal under the old fixed pipeline like just about everything else, it was attached to each vertex. If you opted for the flat shading model then GL would use the colour at the first vertex on the face across the entire thing rather than interpolating it. There's no way to recreate that behaviour under ES.
Attributes are per vertex and uniforms are — at best — per batch. In ES there's no way to specify per-triangle properties and there's no stage of the rendering pipeline where you have an overview of the geometry when you could distribute them to each vertex individually. Each vertex is processed separately, varyings are interpolation and then each fragment is processed separately.