They don't save it to the hard drive, thats the big difference. It doesn't even go through your normal RAM, it all stays in the graphics card.
They don't save it to the hard drive, thats the big difference. It doesn't even go through your normal RAM, it all stays in the graphics card.
Oh.Originally Posted by Andos
Then how would you suggest I could make it work.
Wait for a pixel shader for HWA mode that does the same thing
Half Life 2 does all it's image manipulation and graphics processing in pixel shaders.
Most HWA games are "double buffered" (one frame is being rendered while the last one is being displayed) which makes it trivial to access the last frame and blend it into the current frame. This doesn't give a great motion blur without a high framerate though (at low framerates it can look like the windows mouse when set to "trails" if you're not careful).
Modern motion blur is done by rendering a copy of the scene to another buffer (lower resolution sometimes), but rendering the objects' velocity instead of colour. Then after rendering the main scene (the colour) another pass is done to blur the output based on the information in the velocity buffer.
The first one should be possible with MMF2 HWA. Not so sure about the 2nd one. It might be possible to make a shader that will blur an entire layer based on the scrolling speed, and then have the main character not blurred by having him on the layer above. You could also have a shader that would blur individual objects based on their speed.
I don't know if it will be possible to do this kind of effect through pixel shaders in MMF2 because it needs to manage a bench of pictures and load them later...
Well, a nice looking motion blur only requires a directional blur shader though. You shouldn't even have to look at what the previous frames looked like. All you need to do is to pass on the object's angle and speed into the 'Blur angle' and 'Blur amount' parameters.
I think I've seen a blur effect before, so I can't imagine that a directional blur would be much of a trouble to create. It's most likely a whole lot more CPU/Memory friendly than the alternative anyway (to use the previous pictures).
Yes, a directional blur can be a solution but it's not like a real motion blur (imagine your object moving on a sinus line, you'll not have a good result with a directional blur when the object be at the top of the sinus).
I don't know if you can pass that many parameters to a shader. You'll have to send all objects angle and speed.
Sphax: That probably wouldn't be a problem if you calculate the speed and angle based on the previous frames. If the vertical velocity is 0 when on top of the sinus, then it will not blur in the vertical direction. It would then only blur a little in the horizontal direction which is expected.
Yes Andos, but what I mean is that the trail created by the directional blur will be straight and never "round" like what a motion blur could done.
ah true
Combined with the previous blurred frames you could get something decent though.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote