"We use the word 'politics' to describe the process so well: 'Poli' in Latin meaning 'many' and 'tics' meaning 'bloodsucking creatures'."
More pages: 1 ... 11 ... 21 ... 31 ... 41 ... 51 ... 61 ... 71 ... 81 ... 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 ... 111 ... 121 ... 131 ... 141 ... 151 ... 161 ... 171 ... 181 ... 191 ... 201 ... 211 ... 221 ... 231 ... 241 ... 251 ... 261 ... 271 ... 281 ... 291 ... 301 ... 311 ... 321 ... 331 ... 341 ... 351 ... 361 ... 371 ... 381 ... 391 ... 401 ... 411 ... 421 ... 431 ... 438
Query FailedHumus
Tuesday, June 26, 2012

It should work for any aspect ratio, because we have square pixels, so it should be the same. I'm going by the height because the fov is in the vertical direction. The math is quite intuitive if you draw the frustum from the side, and put a view-aligned plane at distance w into the frustum.
Greg
Tuesday, June 26, 2012

Actually I didn't know such things were possible.
Currently trying to figure out the math, not sure to understand what's going on.

So, basically, you have PixelScale, which is tan(0.5*FOV)/screen_height (i guess you assume an aspect ratio > 1.0 here).

Then you compute the .w component of the projected vertex.

Then, I am not sure why you could get the pixel size at this position by multiplying w and PixelSize together...
Roy
Tuesday, June 26, 2012

This may sound odd because it's such a small detail, but I find it actually vastly improves the perceived quality of the entire scene.
sqrt[-1]
Tuesday, June 26, 2012

Excellent demo - simple and elegant. (as always)
barbie
Monday, June 11, 2012

Can you share the slides from the Nordic talk ?

Cheers!
David C. G.
Monday, May 21, 2012

I recently took over a rewrite of an engine from DX9 to DX11. The previous programmer had decided to take the opportunity to re-architect the entire thing. When I took over, it was well overdue and not even rendering on screen. After many patches and fixing up it was finally working mostly. Now all I had to do was fix a bunch of difficult bugs. A pattern emerged. Many of these bugs were fixed by reverting to methods/code used in the previous version. The previous version encapsulated a lot more than was plainly obvious. It contained a lot of hard won working bug free solutions to problems. Also, to top it off the main feature of the new architecture, deferred rendering contexts performed much slower than the DX9 version. A complete rewrite again to re-introduce a rendering thread brought the performance back in line. The only things that went right with the new code base were bits and pieces that code have easily just been refactored into the DX9 codebase in the first place because that's where we ended up with essentially a refactored DX9 code base with DX11 improvements. This probably took 5 times the effort and cost of doing it 'right' the first time.
UserOfSite
Saturday, May 19, 2012

I want new lessons! OpenGL, DirectX...
islet8
Tuesday, April 10, 2012

Hah~ our boys have the same clothes while taking photos, although I'm living in China.
http://photo.163.com/mwenhui/big/#aid=235580134&id=7510108313
More pages: 1 ... 11 ... 21 ... 31 ... 41 ... 51 ... 61 ... 71 ... 81 ... 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 ... 111 ... 121 ... 131 ... 141 ... 151 ... 161 ... 171 ... 181 ... 191 ... 201 ... 211 ... 221 ... 231 ... 241 ... 251 ... 261 ... 271 ... 281 ... 291 ... 301 ... 311 ... 321 ... 331 ... 341 ... 351 ... 361 ... 371 ... 381 ... 391 ... 401 ... 411 ... 421 ... 431 ... 438