I have to start a 3D-Project for mobile platforms. First of all I would like to outline the main aim - skeletal animation. As for the solution I was thinking of OpenGL ES and C++. So the questions are:
Is OpenGL ES robust enough to handle skeletal animation (including those skinning shaders)
Is OpenGL ES supported widely across mobile platforms, and what are the most famous ones? (for instance, is iPad supported?)
Is this possible anyway, I mean will I have enough computation power?
Is it worth using XNA math library, because of its SIMD optimization (though I'm really unsure that SIMD is supported on mobile platforms, but who knows...).
Is it good to use C++ for this? If yes, then which compiler should I choose for development and testing? Moreover, I have no clue what compilers are used for mobile platforms?
As you might have got it - I've never programmed for mobile platforms yet. Therefore, some general recommendations are welcome.
Yes, OpenGL ES 2.0 can handle vertex skinning for skeletal animations quite well. OpenGL ES 1.1 used a fixed function pipeline, without shaders, so it's harder in the older API to do this, but 2.0 adds support for shaders. OpenGL ES 2.0 is present on all shipping iOS devices (the iPhone 3G S and newer supports it, including both iPads), as well as almost all Android devices (I could only find a couple of very low end handsets that didn't). Windows Phone 7 doesn't appear to support OpenGL ES, but I believe BlackBerry does.
If you're interested in this, I highly recommend reading Philip Rideout's book "iPhone 3D Programming". While it has "iPhone" in the title, he uses generic C++ for almost all of the code in the book, so it should translate to other platforms well and should be easy for you to understand. He even has a section in the "Optimizing" chapter with code for performing vertex skinning on OpenGL ES 2.0 and even 1.1. You can grab the sample code for the book here, including a demonstration of this skinning.
C++ is supported on iOS through Objective-C++, where you could set up the platform-specific UI elements in Objective-C and then do all your backend and rendering logic in C++. Again, Philip does this in his book, and you can see in his source code example applications how he structures this. The people at Imagination Technologies have also set up some platform-agnostic scaffolding in their PowerVR SDK, which some people have used for quickly getting their 3-D rendering up and running on mobile devices. Also in that SDK are some great documents about moving from OpenGL to OpenGL ES, as well as performing various effects on these GPUs.
I have heard of some people getting slightly better performance for small vertex sets by performing transformations on-CPU (on iOS this can be done using the Accelerate framework), but I'd imagine that vertex shaders would be much faster for larger geometry. The PowerVR GPUs that I've worked with in mobile devices are much more powerful than you'd think, particularly the new one that ships in the iPad 2.
You'll need to use the Xcode IDE, with either its GCC or LLVM compiler to target iOS devices, but I believe Android has a few more options in that regard.
In short:
Yes, of course. Why not?
Yes, I suppose. What else? DirectX definitely not.
Yes, I suppose. But depends on what else you want to do.
No, at least not just because of SIMD, as I suppose it is not much supported on mobile platforms, at least the SIMD instructions XNA is optimized for.
Yes, why not? I think the i...s mostly use Objective-C, but there should be compilers for C++, too. Just ask google, as I also don't have any mobile experience.
Related
According to Apple, OpenGL is no longer supported. However, it appears v4.1 of OpenGL was supported on many devices as of July 28, 2020. I have a 2020 Macbook Pro 16" model, which does not show up on the list provided above. While I am sure some form of compatibility exists on my device, I am unsure how I can develop with OpenGL when modern versions are deprecated.
I wish to be developing between my Macbook Pro running Big Sur and my Windows desktop. For this reason, I obviously do not wish to focus on a device-specific library such as Direct3D or Metal. Is it possible to work with newer versions of OpenGL (such as OpenGL 4.6) despite support not being directly provided by Apple? I've heard AMD video cards do not play well with OpenGL, so what options am I left with?
Built-in OpenGL on macOS works a little bit different from other platforms like Windows or Linux. On Windows, system-provided opengl32.dll doesn't actually implement OpenGL but is rather a proxy-library dynamically loading functions from a driver provided by a graphics card vendor. Graphics card vendors provide drivers independently from Microsoft and OpenGL capabilities can be implemented without Microsoft approval.
In contrast, macOS is much more closed system, where all graphic drivers are part of the system and cannot be (normally) updated without updating system itself. Apple holds the full control over OpenGL functionality in system and doesn't give graphics card vendors any way to deliver users more up-to-date OpenGL features (even when their hardware supports them on other systems).
This is quite unpleasant situation for a developer of multi-platform software, as Apple steadily pushes to their platform-specific APIs like Metal as the only choice, which implies a stronger vendor-lock and/or a more expensive development.
An alternative to using platform-specific APIs directly could be using a proxy-library implementing a multi-platform API on top of platform-specific API. So far, currently known options:
Apple's OpenGL implementation over Metal.
Unfortunately, it has stuck on OpenGL 4.1, and there is no reason to expect the version will ever grow up; the library could be even removed in some newer macOS.
You may already notice that information provided by a system library on modern macOS versions mentions Metal, so that it is already a wrapper over other graphics API (although Apple may cheat by accessing some internals).
MoltenVK, an open-source Vulkan 1.1 implementation over Metal.
This is not an OpenGL library, but Vulkan is another multi-platform graphics API and some references tells that MoltenVK in current state is solid enough for using in real projects, and Vulkan 1.1 is expected to give more features than outdated OpenGL 4.1 (though, I cannot confirm this personally, just my expectations).
MoltenGL, a closed-source OpenGL ES 2.0 implementation over Metal.
As current implementation is limited to OpenGL ES 2.0 (e.g. much lower than Apple's built-in OpenGL / OpenGL ES libraries), it looks quite useless...
Google ANGLE, an open-source OpenGL ES implementation over other APIs.
So far, ANGLE implements only OpenGL ES 2.0 over Metal, and OpenGL ES 3.1 (3.2 in progress) over Vulkan. So that with more layers like MoltenVK it could theoretically give more, if layers will not blow up ;). However, even OpenGL ES 3.2 doesn't look good enough compared to OpenGL 4.1. There is also MetalANGLE - an ANGLE library fork adding iOS support and some extra features.
Zink, an open-source OpenGL implementation over Vulkan.
Zink already implements OpenGL 4.6 on Linux (supported OpenGL version depends on exposed Vulkan features and extensions).
There is a work-in-progress making this Mesa Gallium driver working on top of MoltenVK on macOS.
To me, it looks that sticking to OpenGL 4.1 (provided by Apple) for a while is quite a good option in case if your application may afford losing some features requiring higher version of OpenGL. Although Apple has deprecated OpenGL in SDK, so far it looks non-realistic that it will be actually removed in nearest future within newer macOS updates; even Apple M1 GPU received OpenGL 4.1 support on macOS Big Sur. Don't know if Apple has some strategy black-listing applications using deprecated APIs from AppStore market (e.g. system will support OpenGL, but you will not be able publishing application on AppStore), but this might become an issue in some future. Alternative OpenGL 4.6 implementations (on top of Metal or on top of Vulkan-on-top-of-Metal) might come in some distant future.
Relying on Vulkan-on-top-of-Metal implementations might be most provisional choice, but it will certainly require more efforts to develop a graphics engine on top of Vulkan instead of OpenGL. Cannot comment, though, how current MoltenVK implementation is comparable to native Vulkan implementations on Windows for the same graphics hardware (by features/performance/limitations). Of course, using some existing graphics engine already implemented on top of several graphics APIs (Vulkan/Metal/Direct3D/OpenGL/OpenGL ES) will also take this maintenance burden from you, but this is out of scope of initial question.
#gkv311's answer is quite comprehensive. I'll add the following thoughts (full disclosure, I am the lead dev on the MoltenVK and MoltenGL projects):
IMHO, the Vulkan eco-system is your best bet for future-proofing game dev across the largest number of platforms. Here is a good summary of API layering options, based on that approach, allowing options for running OpenGL or DX over Vulkan, and/or Vulkan over Metal, DX, OpenGL, etc.
Some of these layering options can be stacked. For instance, Zink and DXVK can run on top of MoltenVK, providing OpenGL-over-Vulkan-over-Metal and DX-over-Vulkan-over-Metal functionality.
As far as Vulkan goes, MoltenVK has good performance, and good industry traction, being used by a number of AAA games ported from Windows origins, or running on top of Wine. If anyone has any questions, or wants to query some of those game developers, I suggest asking a question in the MoltenVK Discussions area.
MetalANGLE has emerged as another open-source option for OpenGL ES.
WebGl is based on OpelGL ES 2.0.
Is it correct to say that Stage3d is also based OpenGL? I mean does it call OpenGL functions? Or ot calles Direct3D when runs on Windows?
If no, could you explain me, what API does Stage3d use for hardware acceleration?
The accepted answer is incorrect unfortunately. Stage 3D uses:
DirectX on Windows systems
OpenGL on OSX systems
OpenGL ES on mobile
Software Renderer when no hardware acceleration is available. (Due to
older hardware or no hardware at all.)
Please see: http://www.slideshare.net/danielfreeman779/adobe-air-stage3d-and-agal
Good day, Stage3D isn't based on anything, it may share similar methodology/terminology. It is another rendering pipeline, this is why Adobe is soo pumped about it.
Have a look at this: http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplayer/articles/how-stage3d-works.html
You can skip down to this heading "Comparing the advantages and restrictions of working with Stage3D" to get right down to it.
Also, take a peak at this: http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplayer/stage3d.html, excerpt:
The Stage3D APIs in Flash Player and Adobe AIR offer a fully
hardware-accelerated architecture that brings stunning visuals across
desktop browsers and iOS and Android apps enabling advanced 2D and 3D
capabilities. This set of low-level GPU-accelerated APIs provide
developers with the flexibility to leverage GPU hardware acceleration
for significant performance gains in video game development, whether
you’re using cutting-edge 3D game engines or the intuitive, lightning
fast Starling 2D framework that powers Angry Birds.
I'm a relative beginner with OpenGL (I'm not counting the ver. 1.1 NeHe tutorials I've done, because I'm trying to learn to do it the modern way with custom shaders), and I don't quite grasp how the different versions work, which ones require hardware changes, and which ones only require updates to the driver. Also, I've tried to find more details about how GLEW works (without diving into the code - yet), and it's still not clicking. While learning, I'm trying to find a balance between forward and backward compatibility in my code, especially since I'm working with older hardware, and it could become the basis of a game down the road. I'm trying to decide which version of GL and GLSL to code for.
My specific question is this: Why, when I use the GLEW (2.7) library (also using GLFW), does GLEW_VERSION_3_2 evaluate to true, even though the advertising for my GPU says it's only 2.0 compliant? Is it emulating higher-version functionality in software? Is it exposing hardware extensions in a way that makes it behave transparently like 3.2? Is it just a bug in GLEW?
It is an integrated Radeon HD 4250.
Then whatever advertisement you were looking at was wrong. All HD-4xxx class GPUs (whether integrated, mobile, or discrete cards) are perfectly capable of OpenGL 3.3. That ad was either extremely old, simply incorrect, or you read it wrong.
I am aware that there were similar questions in past few years, but after doing some researches I still can't decide where from and what should I learn.
I would also like to see your current, actual view on modern OpenGL programming with more C++ OOP and shader approach. And get sure that my actual understanding on some things is valid.
So... currently we have OpenGL 4.2 out, which as I read somewhere requires dx11 hardware
(what does it mean?) and set of 'side' libraries, to for example create window.
There is the most common GLUT, which I extremely hate. One of main reason are function calls, which doesn't allow freedom in the way how we create main loop. As some people were telling, it was not meant for games.
There is also GLFW, which actually is quite nice and straight-forward to me. For some reason people use it with GLUT. ( which provides not only window initialisation, but also other utilities? )
And there is also SFML and SDL ( SDL < SFML imo ), whereas both of them sometimes need strange approach to work with OGL and in some cases are not really fast.
And we have also GLEW, which is extension loading utility... wait... isn't GLUT/GLFW already an extension? Is there any reason to use it, like are there any really important extensions to get interested with?
Untill now we have window creation (and some utilities), but... OGL doesn't take care of loading textures, neither 3D models. How many other libs do I need?
Let's mention education part now. There is (in)famous NeHe tutorial. Written in C with use of WinApi, with extremely unclear code and outdated solutions, yet still the most popular one. Some stuff like Red Book can be found, which are related to versions like 2.x or 3.x, however there are just few (and unfinished) tutorials mentioning 4.x.
What to go with?
So... currently we have OpenGL 4.2 out, which as I read somewhere requires dx11 hardware (what does it mean?) and set of 'side' libraries, to for example create window.
DX11 hardware is... hardware that has "supports DirectX 11" written on the side of the box. I'm not sure what it is you're asking here; are you unclear on what Direct3D is, what D3D 11 is, or what separates D3D 11 from prior versions?
FYI: D3D is a Windows-only alternative to using OpenGL to access rendering hardware. Version 11 is just the most recent version of the API. And D3D11 adds a few new things compared to D3D10, but nothing much that a beginner would need.
OpenGL is a specification that describes a certain interface for graphics operations. How this interface is created is not part of OpenGL. Therefore, every platform has its own way for creating an OpenGL context. Windows uses the Win32 API with WGL. X-Windows uses the X-Windows API with GLX functions. And so forth.
Libraries like GLUT, GLFW, etc are libraries that abstract all of these differences. They create and manage an OpenGL window for you, so that you don't have to dirty your code with platform-specific details. You do not have to use any of them.
Granted, if you're interested in learning OpenGL, it's best to avoid dealing with platform-specific minutae like how to take care of a HWND and such.
And we have also GLEW, which is extension loading utility... wait... isn't GLUT/GLFW already an extension? Is there any reason to use it, like are there any really important extensions to get interested with?
This is another misunderstanding. GLUT is a library, not an extension. An OpenGL extension is part of OpenGL. See, OpenGL is just a specification, a document. The implementation of OpenGL that you're currently using implements the OpenGL graphics system, but it may also implement a number of extensions to that graphics system.
GLUT is not part of OpenGL; it's just a library. The job of GLUT is to create and manage an OpenGL window. GLEW is also a library, which is used for loading OpenGL functions. It's not the only alternative, but it is a popular one.
Untill now we have window creation (and some utilities), but... OGL doesn't take care of loading textures, neither 3D models. How many other libs do I need?
OpenGL is not a game engine. It is a graphics system, designed for interfacing with dedicated graphics hardware. This job has nothing to do with things like loading anything from any kind of file. Yes, making a game requires this, but as previously stated, OpenGL is not a game engine.
If you need to load a file format to do something you wish to do, then you will need to either write code to do the loading (and format adjustment needed to interface with GL) or download a library that does it for you. The OpenGL Wiki maintains a pretty good list of tools for different tasks.
There is (in)famous NeHe tutorial. Written in C with use of WinApi, with extremely unclear code and outdated solutions, yet still the most popular one. Some stuff like Red Book can be found, which are related to versions like 2.x or 3.x, however there are just few (and unfinished) tutorials mentioning 4.x.
What to go with?
The OpenGL Wiki maintains a list of online materials for learning OpenGL stuff, both old-school and more modern.
WARNING: Shameless Self-Promotion Follows!
My tutorials on learning graphics are pretty good, with many sections and is still actively being worked on. It doesn't teach any OpenGL 4.x-specific functionality, but OpenGL 3.3 is completely compatible with 4.2. All of those programs will run just fine on 4.x hardware.
If you are writing a game, I would avoid things like GLUT, and write your own wrappers that will make the most sense for your game rendering architecture.
I would also avoid OpenGL 4.2 at this point, unless you only want to target specific hardware on specific platforms, because support is minimal. i.e., the latest version of Mac OSX Lion just added support for OpenGL 3.2.
For the most comprehensive coverage of machines made in the last few years, build your framework around OpenGL 2.1 and add additional support for newer OpenGL features where they make sense. The overall design should be the same. If you're only interested in targeting "current" machines, i.e. machines from late 2011 and forward, build your framework around OpenGL 3. Only the newest hardware supports 4.2, and only on Windows and some Linux. If you're interested in targeting mobile devices and consoles, use OpenGL ES 2.0.
GLEW loads and manages OpenGL Extensions, which are hardware extensions from different vendors, as opposed to GLUT which is a toolkit for building OpenGL applications, completely different things. I would highly recommend using GLEW, as it will provide a clean mechanism for determining which features are available on the hardware it is being run on, and will free you from the task of having to manually assign function pointers to the appropriate functions.
OpenGL SuperBible is a pretty good book, also check OpenGL Shading Language. Everything you do with modern OpenGL is going to involve the use of shaders - no more fixed functionality - so your biggest challenge is going to be understanding GLSL and how the shader pipelines work.
I'm currently learning modern OpenGL as well. I've also had hard time finding good resources, but here's what I've discovered so far.
I searched for a good book and ended up with OpenGL ES 2.0 Programming Guide, which I think is the best choice for learning modern OpenGL right now. Yes, the book is about OpenGL ES, but don't let that scare you. The good thing about OpenGL ES 2.0 is that all the slow parts of the API have been removed so you don't get any bad habits from learning it while it's still very close to desktop OpenGL otherwise, with only a few features missing, which I think you can learn rather easily after you've mastered OpenGL ES 2.0.
On the other hand, you don't have the mess with windowing libraries etc. that you have with desktop OpenGL and so the book on OpenGL ES won't help you there. I think it's very subjective which libraries to use, but so far I've managed fine with SDL, ImageMagick and Open Asset Import Library.
Now, the book has been a good help, but apart from that, there's also a nice collection of tutorials teaching modern OpenGL from ground up at OpenGL development on Linux. (I think it's valid on other OSes the name nevertheless.) The book, the tutorials and a glance or two every now and then to the Orange Book have been enough in getting me understand the basics of modern OpenGL. Note that I'm still not a master in the area, but it's definitely got me started.
I agree that it's king of hard to get in to OpenGL these days when all the tutorials and examples use outdated project files, boken links etc, and if you ask for help you are just directed to those same old tutorials.
I was really confused with the NeHe tutorials at first, but when I got a little better understanding of C, compiling libraries on UNIX and other basic stuff, it all fell into place.
As far as texture loading, I can recommend SOIL:
http://www.lonesock.net/soil.html
I'm not sure but I recall I had trouble compiling it correctly, but that may have been my low experience at the time. Give me a shout if you run into trouble!
Another usefull tip is to get a Linux VM running and then you can download the NeHe Linux example code and compile it out of the box. I think you just need GLUT for it to work.
I also prefer GLFW before GLUT, mainly because GLUT isn't maintained actively.
Good luck!
The major point of modern OpenGL is tesselation and new type of shader programs so i would like to recommend to start from a standalone tutorial on OpenGL 4 tesselation, i.e: http://prideout.net/blog/?p=48
After manuals and tutorials a good follow-up is to take a look at the open-source engines out there that are based on top of "new" OpenGL 3/4. As one of the developers, I would point at Linderdaum Engine.
"Modern OpenGL programming with more C++ OOP and shader approach" makes me mention Qt. It hasn't been mentioned yet but Qt is a library that is worth learning and is the easiest way to write cross platform C++ apps. I also found it the easiest way to learn OpenGL in general since it easily handles the initialization and hardware specific code for you. Qt has it's own math libraries as well so all you need to get started with OpenGL is Qt. VPlay is a library that uses Qt to help people make games easily so there are obviously some people using Qt to make games as well.
For a short introduction to Qt and OpenGL see my post here.
I will mention that since Qt abstracts some OpenGL code, if you are trying to use the Qt wrappers, the API is slightly different than just OpenGL (although arguably simpler).
As for my vote for good tutorials or book check out Anton's OpenGL tutorials and Swiftless tutorials. Anton's ebook on Amazon is also rated higher than any other OpenGL published resource I have seen so far (and far cheaper).
I am working on a gaming framework of sorts, and am a newcomer to OpenGL. Most books seem to not give a terribly clear answer to this question, and I want to develop on my desktop using OpenGL, but execute the code in an OpenGL ES 2.0 environment. My question is twofold then:
If I target my framework for OpenGL on the desktop, will it just run without modification in an OpenGL ES 2.0 environment?
If not, then is there a good emulator out there, PC or Mac; is there a script that I can run that will convert my OpenGL code into OpenGL ES code, or flag things that won't work?
It's been about three years since I was last doing any ES work, so I may be out of date or simply remembering some stuff incorrectly.
No, targeting OpenGL for desktop does not equal targeting OpenGL ES, because ES is a subset. ES does not implement immediate mode functions (glBegin()/glEnd(), glVertex*(), ...) Vertex arrays are the main way of sending stuff into the pipeline.
Additionally, it depends on what profile you are targetting: at least in the Lite profile, ES does not need to implement floating point functions. Instead you get fixed point functions; think 32-bit integers where first 16 bits mean digits before decimal point, and the following 16 bits mean digits after the decimal point.
In other words, even simple code might be unportable if it uses floats (you'd have to replace calls to gl*f() functions with calls to gl*x() functions.
See how you might solve this problem in Trolltech's example (specifically the qtwidget.cpp file; it's Qt example, but still...). You'll see they make this call:
q_glClearColor(f2vt(0.1f), f2vt(0.1f), f2vt(0.2f), f2vt(1.0f));
This is meant to replace call to glClearColorf(). Additionally, they use macro f2vt() - meaning float to vertex type - which automagically converts the argument from float to the correct data type.
While I was developing some small demos three years ago for a company, I've had success working with PowerVR's SDK. It's for Visual C++ under Windows; I haven't tried it under Linux (no need since I was working on company PC).
A small update to reflect my recent experiences with ES. (June 7th 2011)
Today's platforms probably don't use the Lite profile, so you probably don't have to worry about fixed-point decimals
When porting your desktop code for mobile (e.g. iOS), quite probably you'll have to do primarily these, and not much else:
replace glBegin()/glEnd() with vertex arrays
replace some calls to functions such as glClearColor() with calls such as glClearColorf()
rewrite your windowing and input system
if targeting OpenGL ES 2.0 to get shader functionality, you'll now have to completely replace fixed-function pipeline's built in behavior with shaders - at least the basic ones that reimplement fixed-function pipeline
Really important: unless your mobile system is not memory-constrained, you really want to look into using texture compression for your graphics chip; for example, on iOS devices, you'll be uploading PVRTC-compressed data to the chip
In OpenGL ES 2.0, which is what new gadgets use, you also have to provide your own vertex and fragment shaders because the old fixed function pipeline is gone. This means having to do any shading calculations etc. yourself, things which would be quite complex, but you can find existing implementations on GLSL tutorials.
Still, as GLES is a subset of desktop OpenGL, it is possible to run the same program on both platforms.
I know of two projects to provide GL translation between desktop and ES:
glshim: Substantial fixed pipeline to 1.x support, basic ES 2.x support.
Regal: Anything to ES 2.x.
From my understanding OpenGL ES is a subset of OpenGL. I think if you refrain from using immediate mode stuff, like glBegin() and glEnd() you should be alright. I haven't done much with OpenGL in the past couple of months, but when I was working with ES 1.0 as long as I didn't use glBegin/glEnd all the code I had learned from the standard OpenGL worked.
I know the iPhone simulator runs OpenGL ES code. I'm not sure about the Android one.
Here is Windows emulator.
Option 3) You could use a library like Qt to handle your OpenGL code using their built in wrapper functions. This gives you the option of using one code base (or minimally different code bases) for OpenGL and building for most any platform you want. You wouldn't need to port it for each different platform you wanted to support. Qt can even choose the OpenGL context based on the functions that you use.