3889 replies to this topic

[chepas]

 

i guess the problem there is that the depth bias was used before for the depth sorting of transparents

 

Yep, I had to set depth bias on transparent ramps above plastics or lamps because you couldn't see through them correctly. They seem to be good with 0 now.

[chepas]

fix reflection if playfield is raised

 

 

This is good news?

[fuzzel]

I hope so. Works for me but maybe I have overseen something as always

[freneticamnesic]

overlooked..

overseen means something different 

[The Loafer]

Fren = malapropism police! 

[lodger]

Fren = malapropism police! 

That would make for a pretty unimpressive episode of COPS. Criminals involved with smuggling are stopped in the act for insisting that they are moving "there" drugs across an international border.

[freneticamnesic]

It's not actually a malaprop as the words don't sound similar, they just have a similar literal translation. Idioms and such are a big part of the reason that the English language is so hard to learn. When you take most of our common sayings at their face value you deal with a lot of confusion.

Especially when two phrases can be so literally similar but have near opposite meanings. It's easier in the case of words, like flammable and inflammable, since the word itself can only have one meaning and the misinterpretation comes from our understanding of the prefix. With words like "Oversee", which means to literally look over, usually referring to managing, and "oversight", and "overlook" which mean you've missed something, that is, an overseer with a propensity to overlook, is probably not very good at his job...

"why do we park on a driveway and drive on a parkway?"

ahem, I mean carry on

[ClarkKent]

Good to have professor fren here...

[sliderpoint]

Would someone be able to give a quick and dirty explanation of how the depth bias works?  Previously I just used the trial and error method to put in some random number so things would work, but don't really have an understanding of how it is supposed to work.  Why do prims, lights, ramps, etc. have a depth bias option, but walls don't?   If I put everything to 0 to start, which direction (+ or -) should I be going to get things to show properly?  Is it Z axis based bottom to top or is it Y axis based front to back for visibility? (maybe that last question doesn't even make sense).

 

Thanks

-Mike

[freneticamnesic]

If you have a transparent ramp primitive, you want to set it to a depth bias lower than the items below it. Walls are static so the depth bias doesn't apply to them. Other primitives though need the depth bias adjusted. If you leave the transparent ramp (primitive) depth bias set to 0, then you want the objects below it to be set to 100, otherwise they disappear. Generally, leave everything at 0 unless you see things disappearing. If things disappear, usually the easiest thing to do is only adjust the depth bias of the thing they're disappearing behind, you can give it a negative number like -100 and then you should be good. You also want to make sure the material opacity is set to active.

[toxie]

 

 

Exporting ramps only exports the bottom and right side of the ramp or is it just me?

 

For optimization reasons, there is only 'one' geometry for all the walls nowadays for rendering. There should be some kind of blender option (which i'm no expert in) to have objects render double sided.

A quick google search brought me this: http://wiki.blender....ls/Editing/Mesh (look for double sided)

 

 

I submitted a bug report on this a few days ago.  I don't think it's a matter of double sided faces, it's the fact that there is literally no Left wall on the ramps that are exported, only the right wall.  They used to export and now they don't.

 

-Mike

 

 

Fixed. (but the double sided faces still are necessary in case blender doesn't do that by now. maya for example has that by default on)

[jimmyfingers]

 

 

 

just a heads up, with rev2143 all the primitive targets, drop targets are missing.... 

mmm I have just enabled the reflection on all my tables, using this rev2143, and they all seem fine. All the targets and graphics are there.

 

It appears that if Depth Bias is set on the primitive objects to other settings than 0, issues can now arise with how they are rendered (faded / distorted, not at all, etc.).  I've verified that on a table with the now (rev2143) missing primitive targets that they return to view if set to Depth Bias 0, however, this is not a permanent solution as the depth bias field is needed on many occasion to deal with layering / rendering issues.  Also of important note is that these new rendering issues occur on the latest build whether the reflection option is enabled or not.

 

Before rev2143 the depth bias for primitives was always 0. What you can try is to negate the bias value e.g. if the depth bias was 500 and the primitive isn't rendered any more set it to -500 and it should be shown again.

 

The table that I see several odd primitive rendering issues (even without the mirroring / pf refleciton option enabled) has the primitives in question already set with a negated Depth Bias (-600 and -601).  So a negative value alone is not the fix.  I can forward you a link to the table in a / the PM thread so you can see this and a few other mirror / reflection related issues.

[fuzzel]

oh yes please. Did it work before rev2143?

[jimmyfingers]

oh yes please. Did it work before rev2143?

Yes, it worked fine before rev2143 / looks normal in rev2120.  Will get that link / diagnostic table ready too.

[BorgDog]

OK, so I couldn't resist and hit the button and updated my laptop to Windows 10.  VP run fine, vp9.9 looks like it should, but VPX gives me this on either desktop or FS mode.  before I go around f-ing up my settings anybody know what this is?  Thanks.

 

[sliderpoint]

A mistake!

But actually try without 4xAA. I've seen issues in the past related to that. (not that look like that though)

-Mike

[gtxjoe]

Check if you have the windows font size increased to 125% or 150%

[BorgDog]

Check if you have the windows font size increased to 125% or 150%

 

did not have it changed, but did try those and none of them made a difference.

 

 

A mistake!

But actually try without 4xAA. I've seen issues in the past related to that. (not that look like that though)

-Mike

 

Yeah, i couldn't help myself.  Other than vpx not liking it it seems pretty decent., price to pay for getting the bleeding edge.

I don't have any AA turned on, but it definitely did have an effect when I use them, no combination so far clears it up.  Here is my current driver settings, tried many combinations here as well and none seemed to make a difference.

 

 

And here is my current VPX video settings.  I think it is back to where I started mucking with it, but not sure.

 

Edited by BorgDog, 30 July 2015 - 05:30 AM.

[freneticamnesic]

Can you have the Light Emission Scale increment by at least 1000? The other ones do but that one increments by 1.... goodness! Considering my number is like 9500000 that could take a while to see anything noticable

[toxie]

OK, so I couldn't resist and hit the button and updated my laptop to Windows 10.  VP run fine, vp9.9 looks like it should, but VPX gives me this on either desktop or FS mode.  before I go around f-ing up my settings anybody know what this is?  Thanks.

 

 

One of the coolest glitch pictures i saw in a while.

But looks like a driver issue to me. So you have to be patient until Intel fixes things i fear.

Can you have the Light Emission Scale increment by at least 1000? The other ones do but that one increments by 1.... goodness! Considering my number is like 9500000 that could take a while to see anything noticable

 

Yup, will do.