Cute video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXo0WdlELJk
This doesn't even look like it runs at a full 60 frames per second unless they are speeding it up in the editing.
Announcing Microsoft DirectX Raytracing
71–80 of 235 posts
Re: Announcing Microsoft DirectX Raytracing
#72Cute video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXo0WdlELJk
This doesn't even look like it runs at a full 60 frames per second unless they are speeding it up in the editing.
I haven't seen evidence one way or the other, but it's specifically labeled "real-time GPU raytracing."
Do you have evidence it doesn't run at 60 fps?
Re: Announcing Microsoft DirectX Raytracing
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
While the above is accurrate I think it's a bit one sided. Physically Based Rendering has become the dominant approach in VFX because it's a huge simplification and productivity boost. Integrating tons of special purpose hacks into one renderer isn't just hard for the renderer devs, the control parameters exposed to artists become an absolute nightmare. Combing the PBR perspective with raytracing greatly simplifies b…
I don't think pure raytracing and ray traced global illumination are going to be adopted by many games if there is still such a giant problem with noise. That is far from a solved problem, even in multi-hour per from visual effects renders.
What do you mean by noise ? I know that Path tracing is incremental and producer a lot of noise at first but there is also other algorithme than part tracing. Also there is good denoiser filter that can be used with fragment shader.
Re: Announcing Microsoft DirectX Raytracing
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does anyone use path tracing for live renderings? I think that is the question.
Demosceners are starting to, for sure. https://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=69642
Video version: https://youtu.be/9r8pxIogxZ0
Re: Announcing Microsoft DirectX Raytracing
#75https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXo0WdlELJk I'm pleased to see that the tech video includes spherical mirrors. As I understand it, all raytracing demos are obliged by universal law to include at least three reflective balls in any promotion of the technology. One day, someone will figure out a game where these super-shiny ball bearings are a critical part of the gameplay, and at that point, raytracing will finally ta…
Even in AAA games of today with amazing graphics, I still see polygons in cylindrical, conical and round objects (I'm not talking about raytracing but regular rendering). Everything looks so realistic, but a well or bucket [1] or some other cylindrical object you encounter looks not round but faceted, breaking the suspension of disbelief. Raytracing may bring more roundness, but why not quadratic surfaces or some oth…
(I do geometry but I'm not in the gaming field)
I'd guess that this is because the fastest way to compute a precise silhouette of an arbitrary shape (like quadratic surfaces) is to do a ray test for every pixel that might hit the surface. You could project the surface onto the image plane to get boundary curves, but (a) determining the curves that make up that silhouette is a complicated geometric process that's prone to numerical error in weird edge cases (of which there are lots) and (b) once you have the projected curves, you still have to actually shade the interior, which require you to project back onto the original surface to figure out the normal, texture, etc. At that point, you're essentially doing little ray tests for each pixel anyway, so why not just raytrace the whole thing? The global illumination approximation is much much better with raytracing, and modern GPUs can do it real-time.
By the way, modelling everything as an analytic surface rather than as a discretized polygon mesh is called "Boundary Representation" or b-rep, and it's what's used in solid CAD programs that engineers use, like Solidworks or Inventor. Engineers and designers like analytic surfaces because they have "infinite" resolution, but even those CAD programs almost invariably polygonalize b-rep to a mesh and then render the mesh, because it's expensive to hit-test all the surfaces involved; computers only recently became able to do that fast enough for real time interaction, and most CAD programs are old old old.
Re: Announcing Microsoft DirectX Raytracing
#76The only issue is that a lot of this is already possible in the current renderers at a reduced cost. - Soft shadows work in WebGL fairly well using PCSS: https://clara.io/player/v2/8f49e7c3-7c5e-43f0-a09c-33a55bb1b... - Translucency can be faked effectively using a few different methods. https://clara.io/view/5c7d28c0-91d7-4432-a131-3e6fd657a042 - Screen space ambient occlusion, if using SAO, is amazing. SAO test: ht…
> Screen space reflections also work
Screen space reflections are an amazing trick and work really well for _some_ things, like reflective floors, water bodies, or objects the player might be holding near the camera (e.g. a weapon)
Since they can't reflect the back sides of objects, or anything outside the camera frustum (which includes the player model) they can't be used for things like mirrors.
The appearance of the reflections being 'clipped' with objects leaving the frustum as you move your head is also quite jarring on VR.
Re: Announcing Microsoft DirectX Raytracing
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
While the above is accurrate I think it's a bit one sided. Physically Based Rendering has become the dominant approach in VFX because it's a huge simplification and productivity boost. Integrating tons of special purpose hacks into one renderer isn't just hard for the renderer devs, the control parameters exposed to artists become an absolute nightmare. Combing the PBR perspective with raytracing greatly simplifies b…
I don't think pure raytracing and ray traced global illumination are going to be adopted by many games if there is still such a giant problem with noise. That is far from a solved problem, even in multi-hour per from visual effects renders.
I guess with games there is already temporal anti-aliasing (TAA), so that would be an effective denoising technique if one was using noisy ray/path tracing.
Re: Announcing Microsoft DirectX Raytracing
#78Friendly reminder DirectX is a proprietary windows-specific API, with its associated lock-in. Don't fall for such simple trap.
Have fun shipping a real product on OpenGL without a proprietary binary driver blob.
Re: Announcing Microsoft DirectX Raytracing
#79And here's a nice demo from Remedy https://youtu.be/70W2aFr5-Xk
It looks great, but it also clearly suffers from the noise issues inherent in most raytracing. In this particluar demo I didn't find it distracting, but when using a lower-performance computer I would expect much worse noice (instead of the usual compromise of removing effects)
Re: Announcing Microsoft DirectX Raytracing
#80The only issue is that a lot of this is already possible in the current renderers at a reduced cost. - Soft shadows work in WebGL fairly well using PCSS: https://clara.io/player/v2/8f49e7c3-7c5e-43f0-a09c-33a55bb1b... - Translucency can be faked effectively using a few different methods. https://clara.io/view/5c7d28c0-91d7-4432-a131-3e6fd657a042 - Screen space ambient occlusion, if using SAO, is amazing. SAO test: ht…
Well, maybe providing an API with fallback (which let's say incorporates those hacks.) is the path towards incremental adoption. Maybe that is the big news here.