Post processing in vidya
- Home
- Board: /v/ - Video Games
- Reading: Post processing in vidya
Do allot of people disable effects like motion blur and depth of field in games? I'm wondering because I'm a graphics programmer and I have heard how people here hate the usual velocity map motion blur effects as they make them nauseous, an example of this motion blur being Crysis 1.
Motion blur looks fucking great imo, gives an exhilarating feeling of speed, what is the general consensus on it?
Example on modern motion blur
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PUzfBxzaYw
>>344865274
Motion Blur DINDU NUFFIN WRONG
Most post-processing looks like shit. DoF, bloom, chromatic aberration, all that crap gets switched off immediately. Motion blur is annoying as well, especially when it's used when the player is turning the character around.
>>344865274
Motion blur is terrible. I don't need something that is naturally caused to be artificially added on.
Depends on the setting and how much of the effect is applied. For example, Dirt 3 had a little bit of motion blur, so I think it looked great, but Trackmania Nations had an absurd amount of motion blur which looked awful.
I thought people liked the motion blur in Crysis 1
I always disable motion blur and DoF, Chromatic Aberration and shit like that. Also FXAA can die.
I like it to an extent, it shouldn't be too overwhelming. For example, i like the motion blur in DOOM.
>>344865274
I disable everything that prevents me from seeing what the shit is going on.
>>344865274
dof,aberation,lens dirt(like flares for some reason), motion blur, bloom - always disable whenever is possible
Most people on /v/ don't care for it, but I think it can be done well. Same thing with DoF. I have a huge hard on for good DoF, I was cumming the entire way through alien isolation. Chromatic aberration is cancer unless it's thematically appropriate, like if you're playing as a robot or something, and even then it should be used sparingly.
>>344865836
>Anti-aliasing ON/OFF
Here's the thing. Any filter just obscures what is supposed to be there. It gets harder to see, what's going on. If I play a racing game, motion blur looks fine for 5 minutes and when I hit something I couldn't properly make out, I turn it off. It also quickly loses novelty if you've seen a bunch of it. It feels like a veil on top of the whole actual video game. The amount of games that make good use of a filter for gameplay purposes and tie it into the aesthetic of the game are miniscule.
>>344865274
All the time. They are always overdone, some dof and hdr can look good, but they are almost always cranked up to the max so you have to turn them off. A slider wold be nice.
You know we PLAY the games not watch them, we need clarity not camera artifacts for cinematic feel.
EVERYTHING OFF
works good in atmospheric games.
>>344865734
I think it looks like shit because it's just a general way of doing things to slap all the example code for HDR, bloom, motion blur, etc which is exaggerated to showcase it better onto a final product. Most programmers don't know enough about the actual mathematics that go into something like velocity map motion blur to really fine tune the shading. I've seen how some games implement bloom and I cringe when I instantly recognize a 256x256 gaussian blur slapped onto a hdr renderer from some tutorial.
>>344865856
Can't find anything about the motion blur method in DOOM, must be that Carmack magic at work again, wish he would fight to GPL the codebase again.
>>344866267
Strange, I personally was put off by DoF a little but turned on by Motion blur. I guess subtlety really is the key in this case.
>>344865274
motion blur and depth of field because my graphics card is a bit dated
I even disable shadows because I don't know really
Asking on /v/ is probably going to give a skewed consensus, most people here probably hate all that shit, but normies probably think things like DoF and motion blurring are great.
Most post processing is applied far, far too heavily handed in vidya to highlight the effect. When games are subtle with it the feect works better - sure it doesn't stand out but it blends into gameplay better leading to overall a better experience.
Funnily enough its FPS games that tend to go overboard on these effects the most. Crysis 3's max motion blur is so strong even moving your gun slightly has the sights blur infront of you.
>>344865274
Motion Blur has the potential of looking good if used sparingly. Needless to say, it never fucking happens, as devs would rather put in 100x the necessary amount. Careful implementations like in your video look alright though.
I usually keep DoF off, just in case I want to look at something.
What's the reason for per-pixel motion blur when simply blending old frames is, I assume, true to real-life eyesight?
>>344866960
CAN'T SEE SHIT CAPTAIN
I turn that shit off the moment I see the option for it. To me it makes games look artificially better instead of looking ok on their own. Motion blur is cancer though
>>344867579
What do you mean by per-pixel motion blur?
>>344866960
Is this a VLC screencap or something? I can barely see fuck all.
>>344867579
Gotta go fast.
>>344866960
CLEAN THE MASK, NIGGER
>>344868016
"velocity map motion blur".
I assume that means a velocity is derived for each fragment over a window of previous frames.
>>344868016
The way velocity map motion blur works is the renderer renders the screen into a velocity map and does the blur calculations per pixel relative to the velocity map. Blending old frames and accumulation techniques are godawful slow.
>>344867186
I think /v/ is the best bet to be honest, on reddit people are too scared to lose their little internet points. I need some real talk about post processing and how gamers actually feel about it.
>>344868232
Nah, I guess a way to think of it is that objects calculate a velocity based on their last frame position and current frame position and puts it in a velocity map.
>>344865756
>naturally caused
Computer monitors don't work like that.
>>344868691
Plus with velocity maps you can have a continuous blur between object positions A and B rather than just blending discrete A and B copies.
>Blending old frames and accumulation techniques are godawful slow.
I've found full-res FBO blitting to be fast.
>>344868825
The witnessing eye does, though.
All monitors have some degree of motion blur also.
>>344868170
If I cleaned that off, would you die?
>>344868232
He shouldn't call that per-pixel motion blur since that's confusing; pixels are picture elements; parts of the projection plane. If you're simply "blending" two images (i.e. take the previous n images and average their pixel values), you're doing pixel operations.
Velocity maps don't deal with pixels but with objects that are represented by similar values in groups of pixels. These objects can move on a sub-pixel basis.
As for the question, I think averaging the frames would be close to what's going on in real life sight (since your eyes are essentially integrating the amount of light received over a certain time period). You get problems when the scene changes abruptly (camera cut) and when things you want the player to see clearly move very slightly -- they get blurred. Identifying objects in the image and assigning them a velocity allows you, for example, to define a threshold below which no motion blur is applied and above which, it is applied. So in a racing game the outside world could be blurred because it's moving fast but your speedo needle won't be because it moves relatively slowly.
Note that this is all speculation based on informed guesses.
>>344868691
> renders the screen into a velocity map
So what exactly is a velocity map? From what I understand it's a 3D matrix of dimensions (screen_y, screen_x, 2) where the x and y displacement of each pixel relative to the next frame are stored. This requires rendering the frame in the first place, identifying parts of the frame that correspond to similar parts in the previous frame (this is slow!), and determining the displacement of each of those pixels (which isn't even true since you don't usually get a 1:1 pixel mapping between frames for the same part of an object).
Contrast with averaging, which is a simple convolution operation that literally any GPU can do in a few milliseconds, if even that.
>>344868825
>not having a 144hz monitor
>>344866960
I don't even know what the HUD of Metro 2033 looks like because the only time I've played through it was in Ranger Hardcore.
>>344869071
>All monitors have some degree of motion blur also.
Only those where the image persists for longer than the inverse of the refresh rate, i.e. where the images blend into one another. If your monitor "zaps" your eyes for a millisecond, then turns off for most of the time until the next image is displayed, there won't be any motion blur from the monitor.
>>344865274
vid looks like shit
>>344869121
It would be extremely nasty.
>>344869405
You're a biglibrarian.
>>344869591
для тeбя
>>344865274
>DoF
fuck that shit, used to excuse shitty LoD and blurry textures, also I want to see shit not play as a granny who lost her glasses
>Motion Blur
fuck that shit sideways, whoever thought any amount of it is a good idea should be shot, biggest meme of PP
>chromatic abb
overdone meme, fuck it
>bloom
depends, usually overdone
>lens effects
only in moderation, often overdone
all in all disabling PP is in 99% of cases better than leaving it on.
fucking "artsy" "muh kino" grahpics are just annoying.
>>344865274
Motion blur is only good in racing games and maybe 30fps console games.
>>344869009
>Plus with velocity maps you can have a continuous blur between object positions A and B
I see, I'm still tweaking my shaders and FBOs, wondering if I could apply the motion blur to a low res bloom texture to maximize performance, not sure how it would look though.
>>344869121
To be honest I'm really not that smart, but the way I think it calculates the velocity is relative to the current screen space vertex position and last screen space vertex position, easy calculation, becomes
vec2 vel = (current.xy * 0.5 + 0.5) - (last.xy * 0.5 + 0.5);
per fragment I think. Then it stores this in a texture as red and green colors, in the final screen texture the shader blurs relative to those values. See pic related, last pic is the velocity map.
>>344865274
Some games do it well (Crysis 1) but the majority do it shit.
Crysis 1 its only applied to objects or some shit and looks fantastic. Every other game smears it all over the screen. A little DoF in cutscenes can look good imo, but most games put tons of it .
>>344865274
First thing I do in any game is go to Options, hit the Ultra button, then disable Motion Blur and Depth of Field, then we are good to go.
>>344870649
>Crysis 1 its only applied to objects or some shit and looks fantastic
Awesome! That's the method I'm implementing, I really hope gamers give good post processing a chance and don't instantly turn it off.
>>344870390
>blur with sharp edges
It's the absolute worst.
>>344865274
Depends on how heavy the blurring is
>>344870843
>instantly turn it off.
Mandatory though, DOF and MB are eyecancer inducing crimes against humanity.
Devs think anybody but the most casual console plebs like their games to look like an alcoholic's recollection of last nights blurry adventures.
>>344870390
>relative to the current screen space vertex position
Maybe I'm misunderstanding something here but to me it looks more like the _world coordinates_ of the vertices are used to calculate the velocity map, which is not a 2D "texture" but rather a property of those vertices (also the color of that presentation doesn't really matter).
> per fragment
You can't just glance over this bit; there are thousands of vertices in any given scene and calculating their velocity is NOT trivial. There's a reason why rendering algorithms like ray casting (which is relatively primitive) are so slow -- iterating over all the polygons in a scene to check whether they're visible from the eye point takes time.
> blurs relative to those values
Also nontrivial. Blurring is low-pass filtering, which is convolution with a given filter kernel. If you only want to blur part of the image you have to define different kernels for different values of the velocity map and apply them to the correct image regions (convolution in itself is a global operation). I just can't imagine how this is allegedly faster than just applying a blur filter over subsequent frames, which happens in screen space on a per-pixel basis. I can calculate a simple example for you if you want.
Motion Blur to make things feel cinematic is great.
But it has to be done correctly.
On a camera you can tune the ampubt of time you capture light pee frame,bthe shorter this time delta, the less blur you get.
At 24 fps, cinematographers know how to getvthe right fluidity of motion for certain shots.
Good motion blur in games will be able to apply this same amount of smearing, per object, at higher framerates.
Bloom is fine if done correctly, I turn bloom on in system shock 2 because its not low res and can be tweaked so it just barely gives a glow effect to brighter objects.
>>344870708
Is that the new GTX 590?
>>344865274
If you want to achieve realistic visuals, motion blur is a must. Children here just don't understand this and think all games should have nintendo tier kiddy stylization with no realism whatsoever. It is nintendogaf after all.
>>344871935
>t. console pleb playing CoD
>>344871935
>motion blur
>realism
weak bait.
>>344872204
Pretty sure this was bait, dude. I hope so anyway. No one can act that unironically fedoracore,r-right?
>>344872204
PCfag actually. Go back to your shitty mario/zelda threads, kid.
>>344872397
How is it bait? Motion blur happens in real life. Kill yourself retard.
>>344872463
Oh ok just a bait, got me worried for a moment there.
>>344872462
>>344872507
Nope, you're a fucking mongoloid.
>>344872397
I'd not be surrpised if you never left your basement.
Driving and high speeds causes motion blur and tunnel vision.
>>344871472
Yeah I admit the "faster" bit was more of a guess.
I don't really get if you're legitimately schooling me or haven't done FBO programming.
Having multiple textures of the color buffer stored is not the only resource consuming thing here, you also have to do some sort of mix between them in the final fragment shader.
It's not world coordinates, currentpos and lastpos are in the vertex shader
currentPos = vertexWorldPos * ViewProjectionMat;
lastPos = vertexWorldPos * lastViewProjectionMat;
Making them screen coordinates. This is a really cheap calculation. But hey, I'm still getting my code to work. Have you programmed shaders? I'm working on a shitty laptop and matrix calculation in shaders is fucking blazing fast. I mean I can simulate 500 cube particles that do a mat4*mat4*mat4*vec4 for each vertex and I'm getting like 90fps.
>>344872537
>>344872463
>>344871935
>>344872648
amazing how easy it is to bait in /v/, well done anon.
>>344872648
Just waving your hand in front of you causes motion blur. Can't argue with these literal retards, they're like a cult.
>>344872784
Again your only argument is LE BAIT XD. Eat shit dumb fuck.
>>344872840
>>344872932
no need to samefag your bait, you are doing enough shitposting already.
>>344872652
I'm probably thinking too low-level here; I don't have any experience with shader APIs and other stuff on that level of abstraction, I just know signal processing and how you'd program a renderer in C or even fucking assembly without using premade libraries other than window manager APIs to display your results etc.
Nevertheless I'm writing a short example. It's as much teaching others as it's revision for me.
>>344873025
>doesn't even know what samefag means
It's like you came straight from r/gaming.
UGH
real life needs to tone down the motion blur and hdr
just walking around with my eyes open is triggering
>>344865274
>Do allot of people disable effects like motion blur and depth of field in games?
i would say everybody who even knows that there is a graphic options menu does this.
not sure why companies cling to having them in the first place.
at least have them set off by default to save us from having to do it every time we launch a new game
>>344873412
I'm pretty sure companies have better statistics than you on what people want or not, retard.
>>344873217
>what are post timers
you tried.
>inb4 inspect_element.jpg
>>344865274
How to make your game look like dogshit with one simple trick!
No seriously. I almost always set motion blur to low or sometimes off and disable depth of field.
The ONLY TIME I CAN THINK OF DEPTH OF FIELD BEING WELL APPLIED IS A MOD FOR MORROWIND http://www.nexusmods.com/morrowind/mods/41102/?
MGE is actually a pretty fucking great mod. It takes a game that very much looks like it came out in 2001 and brings it up to acceptable levels for 2016. It's very impressive.
Anyway on point, almost no one does DoF right and it usually makes the game look like an eyesore. Motion blur has been done well more often than DoF but it's still almost always crap.
And if you're making anything like a competitive game I'm turning it off immediately. I don't know why developers think that in a multiplayer FPS I want to willingly sacrifice accuracy and awareness for graphical quality.
Post processing in general is sad as fuck. It's either BLUE GUYS CHECK OUT MY BLUE FILTER or PISS / BROWN FILTERS GUYS HOW REALISTIC
>>344873589
>stop having opinions contrary to mine!
don't be so salty.
OP asked, I answered, nothing you can do about it.
I can't believe anyone argues that post processing makes the game look better or helps immersion.
Probably the same fuckheads who want to see their own feet/noses/blinking in FPS.
>>344873626
>And if you're making anything like a competitive game I'm turning it off immediately. I don't know why developers think that in a multiplayer FPS I want to willingly sacrifice accuracy and awareness for graphical quality.
Amen.
>>344873612
Let me help you redditor, samefag is someone who pretends to be 2 different people. I did no such thing. I made 2 posts replying to 2 different posts. Dipshit.
>>344873972
you are quite angry and triggered, do you get mad about internet posts a lot?
downvoted.
>>344874070
>u mad bro xD
As expected from the likes of you
>>344873829
What's wrong with seeing your feet in FPS? Are you fucking retarded? I'm gonna say yes.
>>344874189
but you are mad, you are spilling your tears all over the thread.
downvoted and reported so the subboard moderators can issue a shadowban on you.
>>344874340
Epic, simply epic, keep it up
>>344865274
More often than not, yes.
Motion blur is usually just way too aggressive and blurs the entire screen to shit even when you move your view slowly. If used in moderation I may leave it on.
Depth of field on the other hand, I turn off every single time. It simply DOES NOT WORK because it assumes the player's eyes are always focused on the centre of the screen.
>>344865274
My first time noticing it is in Doom, and I love it. Adds an intense fast paced feel to the game.
I think the people complaining about it are just a vocal minority. The same genetic failures who get car sick or sea sick while everyone else just stands around laughing at them.
Dont sacrifice the quality of games for these faggots. They just need to man the fuck up.
>>344874543
>it assumes the player's eyes are always focused on the centre of the screen.
Another retard talking about things he doesn't understand. Amazing how many there are ITT.
>>344865274
Motion Blur and Depth of Field are great!!!!!111!!!!!!1!!
Motion blur is great when used subtly and in conjunction with a minimum of 60 fps. Hit or miss with quick-reflex games, though. Doom is the only exception I can think of.
That said, I feel like there's a misconception that, like how it is in movies, blur makes up for slower framerates. This is absolutely untrue, as it only adds to the problem in games.
As long as it's an option, though, who cares?
>>344865274
Anyone who has driven fast a fast vehicle knows this isn't what high speed looks like
what the fuck
>>344868825
>Turn off motion blur
>In high speed motion things that pass you become still become blurred
Am I missing something?
>>344865274
If I wanted motion blur, I would have bought a high latency LCD monitor.
Depths of field can be good to hide bad textures and aliasing in the distance, but it's just too much blur in most games.
Also fuck off with the lens flares and ambient occlusion. Way overdone in games.
>>344874940
>ambient occlusion
>bad
Kill yourself
>>344875214
It's rarely done right. In most games it gives an unnatural black halo to everything
>>344875214
>tries to compare graphics quality
>uses gif
i keked audibly
>>344875214
That looks fucking awful, though. Light doesn't work that way irl.
>>344875389
This isn't 2007 anymore, HBAO+ fixes the black halo appearance
>>344875392
>unironically being this retarded
>>344875494
Seriously kill yourself moron
>>344875560
>uses gif in a graphical comparison
>calls others retarded
this is getting better by the minute
>>344875560
>le kill yourself meme
Nice comeback. You sure showed me!
I turn all that shit off immediately. DoF is probably the worst offender though. I'll let my eyes naturally do that if they want I don't need arbitrary bullshit blocking my view of the game. Also always turn off film grain and vignette and motion blur and chromatic aberration. They're all terrible.
>>344875654
The comparison conveys what it's meant to, go be retarded somewhere else, shit stain.
>>344875704
Does light work IRL the way it does in the AO off image? No? Kill yourself nigger.
>>344874642
>plays doom 4
>likes motion blur
Straight off of Facebook. Get the fuck off this site you underaged shit.
>>344875891
holy moley the buttmad is off the charts!
somebody call the fire department this anon's butt is going to burst soon!
motion blur is shit, if you need an effect to tell you're going fast you're doing it wrong.
you don't need extra effects screwing with your vision when you already have to concentrate, gamers with slower brain processing skills will get pissed at your game if they can't turn it off. the things you learn from friends.
and yes stuff like that can make you nauseous too, look up the guitar hero tunneling effect, if you play for too long you basically have to be NASA immune to spinning else you feel like everything IRL is moving upward for a while.
>>344876074
>I was merely pretending xD
>>344875891
I never said either render was a good example of lighting, you retard. Learn to into reading comprehension.
I always disable:
Radial Blur
Motion Blur
Chromatic Aberration
Lens Flare
I always tweak or disable if I can't and it's badly tweaked:
Depth of field
Bloom
>>344876160
The fact that you ignored that it's an obvious improvement and concentrated on how AO doesn't singlehandedly make a game look like real life shows how fucking stupid you are, you shit eating waste of oxygen.
framerate is the most important obviously
but I will disable everything that adds any amount of blur for any reason
i just care about textures being clear and some nice AA
>>344865274
Hiding shitty textures and trying too hard to look like a cheap action movie is the only reason Motion Blur and DOF exist in the first place.
Instant turn off.
OP don't ever listen to /v/ when it comes to graphics, most of the "opinions" you see brandishes here are nothing but regurgitation of a pesudo hivemind that stems from a total shit taste and lack of understanding of visuals at it's most basic level.
Motion blur, as you may already know anyway, can be perefectly good when executed properly like Crysis or Metro games do.
I especially found Crysis 3's motion blur to be really good, particle motion blur was also amazing.
Depth of field is also good, it just needs good implementation and integration to the gameplay, like in Metro when you look at your watch adding a soft blur to the rest of the screen. Bad example of DoF would be games that just throw it there and it becomes obtrusive to the gameplay.
I mean, I don't even know why you made this thread, if you're a graphics programmer you should already know more than 99% of /v/, probably more than me as well.
>>344876083
>gamers with slower brain processing skills will get pissed at your game if they can't turn it off. the things you learn from friends
>He pretends that it's his friends and not him with a slow brain who can't handle motion blur
lmao
you sad cunt
>>344876519
I can fly while spinning and not give a fuck, go troll someone else.
Shit tier:
>DOF
>Motion blur
>Chromatic Aberration
>Bloom
>Lens Flare
>Lens Dirt
>Color Filters
Pretty cool tier:
>AO
>God rays
>Rain droplets when you look up
>Antialiasing
>Anisotropic filtering
>>344876282
>ignored that it's an obvious improvement
I didn't ignore anything. Your claim was that AO is good and you provided an example. A poor example of AO at that, so respective of that scene I don't think AO improved anything because it in my opinion looks like shit.
>>344865274
I ALWAYS without exception disable motion blur, depth of field, and chromatic aberration. They are completely unnecessary
DoF and Motion Blur are both cancer used to cover shitty frame rates
>>344876608
>>344876519
>>344876083
You both sound absolutely fucking retarded.
>>344876689
>poor example of AO
ACU uses HBAO which is the best form of AO.
And you actually think the AO off scene looks better? I don't know what to tell you. Just shit taste. It's literally fullbright lighting.
>>344876774
>implying you can hear text
nice discussion about post processing video effects we're having huh.
>>344876774
You too
>>344876948
Don't try to argue with /v/ about graphics.
Ambient Occlusion is one of the best things to happen to graphics in modern history, while phisically inaccurate it increases image quality so much it's unbelievable how people can ever say it's bad.
The only thing that may come to mind is Far Cry 3's horrible implementation of AO overall.
But most games have pretty good AO settings.
>>344876769
>DoF is used to cover shitty frame rates
lmao, you fucking retard
>>344876769
DoF is actually to cover shitty LOD
>>344877180
>>344877195
Ok autists, DoF is for LoD but motion blur is 100% only around to cover frame rates
>>344877118
Agree, finally some common sense around here.
>>344877294
Or to simulate real life, since motion blur exists in real life, dumbass.
All of that off as soon as I launch the game.
Motion blur, CA, DoF, lens flares etc. are all just annoying gimmics to make game look more "cinematic". Leave that shit for movies and photographs because games are not movies and I want to actually see what is going on.
>>344877541
Hi Sonypony
>>344877541
sure but only after i downed a bottle of vodka
>>344877541
>implying the average basement dwelling /v/irgin even knows what motion blur looks like in real life
I don't get how FXAA is still a thing. It looks so bad
>>344865734
But if it's a realistic game then motion blur is required because it exists when you turn quickly in real life too retard
or are you so fat you cant even turn your neck pcuck?
>>344865274
I almost never turn them off. Rarely do they make a game look like shit to me. Sometimes bloom fucks it up so I'll tune that down, or something like vignette or film grain that is way too strong and retards the experience, but I'm perfectly fine with motion blur.
Of course, it's always best to have the option.
>>344877743
2007 FXAA was horrible, but modern FXAA isn't that bad. And it's already been replaced by SMAA on every game that came after 2013.
Would you believe me if I said that the only antialiasing used in this picture is FXAA?
>>344877664
>>344877684
Wave your hand in front of you. It's motion blur, kids.
>>344877997
Yes, and its how your EYES PERCIEVE THINGS. YOU STILL LOOK AT VIDEO GAMES WITH YOUR EYES SO THERE IS NO NEED FOR MOTION BLUR
>>344877997
Spin in a circle outside, notice the lack of blur on the trees/buildings around you?
>>344878142
Not him but please stop pretending to be retarded.
>>344878083
Objects seen through a monitor aren't perceived the same way they do in real life, dumbass.
>>344878083
Actually that's wrong, your eyes don't focus the same way on a flat 2d screen as they do on a 3d environment.
That's why depth perception, motion perception are skewed in screens.
Your eyes literally don't see the same way on a screen as they do in real life.
>>344877997
no blur, do you have eye damage from sitting too close to your TV?
Who cares if MB is realistic or not (it is not), it still looks like dogass.
>>344877937
>4860x2734
That's some bullshot that went through photoshop before being published. Probably rendered at 8k or something.
FXAA still is just a horrible smudge filter in every game I've ever played
>>344878240
If the real world looks like it has motion blur on you should see a doctor.
But really you are just defending your shitty consoles lack of power.
>>344865274
>i'm a graphics programmer and I don't understand why people turn off motion blur
you aren't a graphics programmer. you want to be one.
>>344878273
>hehe I'm superman my eyes don't have motion blur xD
>>344865274
Per-object motion blur is great, full-screen motion blur (when turning around in an FPS for example) is absolute unadulterated cancer.
>>344878083
this
its the same as having a character blinks in 1st person effect, you will blink yourself, so its not needed.
already been called retarded once in this thread, figure it out yourselves from here. or don't, I stopped caring.
>>344878398
>the retard is a platform warrior
No surprise there.
>>344876948
>And you actually think the AO off scene looks better?
The post-processed scene doesn't make logical sense.
Not everything in the world casts a shadow, because the AO post-process is bum-fuck retarded thanks to Ubisoft being utter SHIT at making a game engine. Shit that does cast a shadow casts deep shadows that don't make sense given the direction of the light. Stuff that doesn't cast a shadow should be casting a shadow.
>>344878398
I'm sorry you're so fucking fat you can't move your body at all to witness natural motion blur PCuck.
If you were able to turn your head side to side, you'd see the motion blur.
>>344877841
kek motion i effective when you got low fps
at 60 and more fps the image is already blurry
it's ok in race game to simulate speed thought
>>344878386
It's not a bullshot, it's a screenshot I took myself.
2734p is the render resolution I used, with tweaked FXAA settings then downsampled to 1440p.
Resolutions, anti aliasing solutions... things that come and go.
As simple as knowing what you're doing.
>>344878492
They were right, you're retarded.
>>344877841
Motion blur also happens when the pixels are physically shifting to the right on your screen, your eyes are creating depth of field and motion blur on their own. Ambient occlusion, motion blur and depth of field effects are all obligatory effects in AAA games now, but thankfully we can turn that shit off on PC for the most part.
>>344878635
You have no idea what you're talking about.
>>344878560
Did you miss the memo where everyone said that AO is physically inaccurate?
>>344877997
i can see my hand at more than 30 and below frame per second thought
>>344878510
>Projecting
I own a PS4 and Xbone, i'd love if exclusive games ran at 60FPS on them. They don't so they cover em in blur to cover it up.
>>344878561
Hahahah anon come on. By your logic you wouldn't be able to make out a football while it was in the air.
>>344877841
Motion blur and depth of field work in real life because you are always focusing on the thing that is in focus, obviously.
In a videogame I'm not staring at the center of my screen constantly, I'm looking around and I don't want to see blurry shit everywhere.
>DoF
If its done well it can be easy on the eyes and help bring attention to the center of the screen while hiding ugly LODs
>Motion blur
I usually leave it on if I can set it to low or its done well like in The Worse mod for Watch Dogs
>AA
A combination of low FXAA and medium SMAA is the best way I've found to reduce pixelation and it costs almost nothing
>>344878803
>By your logic you wouldn't be able to make out a football while it was in the air.
>motion blur makes objects invisible
How stupid can you get lol
>>344878781
That's what I am arguing you dumb shit. The AO in Unity looks like utter trash, but the AOfag who posted >>344875214
wants to false-dilemma me so he can "win" the argument.
>>344878612
says the guy namecalling on a mongolian cave drawing board.
Usually the only post processing option I like is DOF, and only when it is a well done Bokeh
>>344877937
>4860x2734
And upsampling
When you zoom in it looks like shit
Also jpg
yes, the first thing I do in a game's settings is to disable bloom, blur, chromatic aberration and so on
>>344878981
Nobody said AO is accurate. If your argument is that AO is trash because it's inaccurate, you must think the same about other graphical features like shadows. Better turn them all off because they're not accurate right? Absolute shit for brains.
>>344878948
>Make out a football in air
>Football is invisible
Pick one anon
But hey we can go back and forth on this till the cows come home. Stone cold fact is blue is used to cover up shitty frame rates. If you think it looks good then you're in luck, Sony has a plastic box that does it in almost every game.
For the rest of us we will turn it off and enjoy a better looking gaming
>>344879303
>Sony has a plastic box that does it in almost every game.
So does PC. Why are you trying to make motion blur a Sony thing, just to make it seem bad? Pathetic as fuck. I'm a PCfag and I play almost every game with motion blur on. Just because you're too brain damaged to handle realistic graphical effects doesn't mean we all are.
>>344879187
No upsampling. And of course it's a JPG, if I post the original PNG it's like 8MB and I can't post it here.
Here's what the downsampled version looks like.
>>344879285
Careful with those mental gymnastics, m8, you'll pull a brain hammy.
>>344865274
most retarded shit to use on pc, acceptable on consoles
and that's where it should be and never leave, because you need to be far away from your screen to be able to enjoy this effect
>>344879484
>Why are you trying to make motion blur a Sony thing
I would say it's a console thing but the WiiU and Xbone are such jokes it's not worth even bringing them up.
>I'm a PCfag and I play almost every game with motion blur on
You are making your games look worse on purpose.
>brain damaged to handle realistic graphical effects
You're the one that thinks motion blur looks good, you might wanna go get a MRI to see if you got brain cancer or something. Like I said if you think motion blur looks like real life you need glasses
>>344875214
it's too expensive in terms of improvement vs performance
>>344879856
It's your opinion that it looks worse, but motion blur occurring in real life is a fact. You must be legitimately retarded.
>>344877841
A normal person blinks when turning around in fast speed because your eyes/brain wants to avoid motion blur.
>>344879981
What?
It's barely a performance hit.
Of all graphics effects AO is one that has one of the best performance cost to visual results ratios.
Unless you're doing something crazy like SSDO or SSGI with a lot of samples the AO is going to barely have a performance cost. 5fps at most with AO and 10fps at most with HBAO. If you're already running a game at 60+fps, using AO won't drop your frames much.
>>344867579
real life motion blur is a result of "continuous exposure" to the imagery. Meanwhile a game will produce distinct time slice images. So, let's say you're going 60Hz, then on film and in "reality" each frame would be the sum exposure of 16ms, with all the motion that comes with it. On a computer game, each frame would be a 0ms instant, all about 16ms apart. All the motion happening between them is gone.
Now, when you blend old frames, you introduce motion data of more than the 16ms the frame is supposed to cover. The result is an after-image or ghosting effect. In fact you can often see the distinct copies of the individual frames because of that. Meanwhile per-pixel motion blur tries to recover the motion information that is gone because of the 0ms instant, and applies it to the image. The result is an approximation of what the motion of the last 16ms would have looked like.
So, per-pixel motion blur is far more "accurate", as far as accuracy is possible. summing up old frames is cheap old school motion blur that gave motion blur the bad reputation.
>>344868691
claims the accumulation techniques are dead slow, but they've been implemented in the mid 90s already, and they're fairly "free", if you got a spare buffer around.
>>344880071
>It's your opinion that it looks worse
True
>motion blur occurring in real life is a fact
As how it's shown in most video games? False.
>You must be legitimately retarded
Once again you are the one saying you prefer motion blur and turn it on when you can so I wouldn't throw stones if I were you
>>344878981
AO was never physically accurate, most ao in real life never ever works like in video games, but than again real life doesn't need to bake down lightmaps. AO used correctly can add more depth to certain areas in games sometimes. Stop using the company that invented AO haloing alongside square enix to argue about a visual system. Are you going to complain about fast approximation reflections to not be physically accurate as well? If you want realism go outside your house.
>>344880173
>if you have a 2000$ pc you certainly won't experience any fps drop
you're missing the point, you don't use top of the line computers to measure how much impact certains features have - you need a pc at 55~60fps to properly measure how all that shit works
http://pastebin.com/LCRdAZHx
AUTISM
Might have some small errors but the general idea should hold.
>>344880173
There are some games that suffer from real time AO but that is due to the type of algorithm they used and how many samples they use to compute it. It does get worse when you have open world games rendering AO a million miles away because lack of proper LOD
>>344880538
>AO was never physically accurate
nothing realtime is physically accurate. That's not a goal anyway. It just needs to resemble reality visually, and AO does (SSAO not so much)
/v/ likes to pretend they hate this stuff because some guy on /v/ was once very vocal about hating this stuff. The rest of the herd simply jumped on the bandwagon. It "sounds" like something a real gamer would think, so these mentally vacant morons decided that's what they need to think.
You'll often hear these posers claim things like "this is not how it looks like in real life" or "eyes don't behave like this, cameras do" while ignoring that they are looking at a screen which in and of itself is very far removed from a real life looking-through-your-eyes fully tridimensional experience.
It's very likely this meme didn't originate on 4chan. Some popular opinionated online personality may have been very autistic on this topic and the little /v/ shitlets, starved for an identity of their own, simply co-opted these opinions for a lack of ability to form their own opinions.
>>344865274
Motion blur is good if done right. (black ops 3, Crysis 3)
>>344865274
Fuck motion blur
You know what gives you an "exhilarating feeling of speed"?
Going fast.
>>344880291
Good, you've conceded that motion blur is a thing that happens in real life, so this argument is over. Graphical effects in vidya being inaccurate is a nobrainer. It's obviously all an approximate simulation.
>>344880767
you know what happens when you go fast? The distance covered between frames becomes bigger, much bigger. If only we had a mechanism to retain the movement information happening between consecutive frames ...
>>344865274
there is a difference between per object motion blur and whole frame blur or radial blur
i hate both latters
per object is fucking awesome
>>344880714
I only really hate motion blur and DoF. AO looks great and is as big of a thing as AA. I can even get down with a little chromatic aberration if the art style of the game gels with it
>>344881015
wth is whole frame blur? radial blur is not motion blur
>>344880618
I forgot to include the actual result. FUCK. Give me a sec.
>>344865274
I didn't buy a 144hz monitor so you retard devs could blur it the fuck up with your retarded fuckin bullshit made to hide consoles imperfections.
>>344880714
So much this. Fuck all of these bandwagoning retards.
>>344880817
>you've conceded that motion blur is a thing that happens in real life
I never said it wasn't but keep moving the goalposts to fit whatever dumb shit logic you are trying to force to justify your shitty tastes in graphical effects. I said how it is presented in video games is not realistic and is only used to cover shitty frame rates.
>>344880714
Oh so were just making up shit now eh? ok then.
>>344881165
You know 144hz introduces motion blur by itself because movement becomes too fast for the eye
>>344865274
I turn off motion blur but I don't hate it. What I absolutely abhor is Depth of Field, it is the dumbest fucking shit I've ever seen in my life and people actually give up GPU power to muddy their screen because of autism.
>>344881406
the brain accumulating information is very different from the display denying information
>>344881430
DoF makes sense in cutscenes, same way it makes sense in movies. Cutscenes however, don't belong in games to begin with.
>People in this threads are unironically defending motion blur
>>344881292
If it's something that happens in real life, then why, in your tiny little brain, is it only done in vidya to mask framerate? Maybe it's done to mimic the real life effect? Again using the argument that video game graphical effects are not 100% true to life when it's obvious, you are one stupid piece of shit.
>>344880672
I can't think of a single game, at least not with patches, that rendered AO at super long distances.
Because AO is most often programed with something called Distance Culling, which means that at a certain z-depth distance AO simply stops being calculated, and before it stops being calculated it is calculated and faded out.
Also the amount of samples used in most games is usually way too low, I can't think of a game that used too many samples as opposed to too few.
Can you give me any examples of those games you mention?
>>344880548
Any decent GPU will be able to pull off AO with good framerates.
Even console games have AO solutions in them and the framerate holds up pretty well.
Again, unless you're doing something like HBAO+, SSDO or SSGIAO you won't be losing on many frames.
>>344881370
He isn't wrong, people are extremly vocal while ignorant on these themes on /v/. It's something that's been astonishing me for years, ever since bloom started to become a thing circa 2006 people have hated on the bandwagon of hating post processing effects. And while I do agree that many times these effects are not implemented very well the way people here talk about them is just plain stupid.
I mean hell today for the first time in my life here do I see someone bashing AO for being a bad visual effect.
>>344881579
>DoF makes sense in cutscenes
Absolutely disagree. Artificially reducing the quality of half or more of the screen to simulate muh realism while hurting performance is serious autism no matter where it occurs.
>>344877841
your eyes naturally do that for fast changing scenery, you don't need the game to do shit for you
Motion blur can be fine but generally I turn it off recently because it'll a lot of the time ruin screenshots. I don't think most games let you only turn on object motion blur either, you have to have fullscreen motion blur on too. And it should be subtle.
DoF is similar in that I like it sometimes but generally not during gameplay. It can add a lot to cutscenes I think but more often than not it looks like garbage during gameplay. Think Crysis or CoD Ghosts where if you aim down your sights everything besides the sights gets blurry. DoF should also always be bokeh. MGSV has the best dof usage I've seen in a video game.
I don't think I've ever played a game with chromatic aberration, or at least one that has it be really obvious so I don't really have an opinion on that outside of why anyone would want to play with a camera defect on.
Depends on the game. Racing games are the only ones where I'm willing to deal with motion blur and some dof.
>>344881840
/tv/ here, I just spilled my drink, you retards are fucking hilarious.
>>344881840
>Artificially reducing the quality
That's not the purpose of DoF in cutscenes. Remember, cutscenes are not interactive. The language of movies applies. There DoF is occasionally used to control the audience's focus
>simulate muh realism
not the purpose, not in cutscenes, anyway
>hurting performance
irrelevant in cutscenes, they're not interactive
I disable motion blur a lot of the time because I like to see what's going on - plus, it's a really un-necessary performance hit.
DoF and CA often get the boot, too.
>>344881879
>your eyes naturally do that
if the incoming imagery is sufficient. At video game framerates it's not. That's why it makes sense for videogames to provide some of the motion information
>>344882036
>>344881987
Movies>Real life
is what you guys are arguing as far as video game graphics go. Shit never ever looks like that even when focusing on far away shit, at least not as bad as they usually make it. Besides, if my eyes could figure out how to make everything pretty when focusing at far away things I'd prefer it. I don't want to pretend that I'm watching a movie, I want to pretend that I'm doing cool shit
>>344881814
>If it's something that happens in real life
I've addressed this so many times I'm starting to think you are trolling. How it is depicted in video games is not anywhere near how it our eyes work in real life. Stop ignoring me when I say this.
>Again using the argument that video game graphical effects are not 100% true to life when it's obvious, you are one stupid piece of shit.
Video game blur is so different from how humans see motion you can't even use a percent to say how close or far apart motion blur is from our eyesight.
Please stop anon, you are so retarded. You are trading fine details esp while moving for nothing.
>>344865274
How long did it take you to realize that teaching children how graphics works on /v/ was a bad idea, with this thread?
>>344881881
MGSV had pretty bad DoF in my opinion.
Crysis 3 had a much better DoF.
The problem with Crysis 3's DoF was that it had 2 steps of blur, one that was the actual DoF and a second blur that was two blur bars on the sides of the screen, in my opinion it was better to disable those bars with the console commands and just let the proper DoF do the work on the weapon's sights DoF(which would get blurred by default) and then turn off the blur on the rest of the game.
The problem with games implementing DoF is that they usually overdo it, by adding too many steps of blur, when they could simply just blur the weapon and leave the rest of the world to be unblurred.
>>344882257
>is what you guys are arguing as far as video game graphics go
cutscenes are movies, whether you like it or not
>if my eyes could figure out how to make everything pretty when focusing at far away things I'd prefer it
deep focus is a thing, even in cinematography. It's a tool, like everything else.
>I don't want to pretend that I'm watching a movie
that's precisely what you're doing during a cutscenes.
>I want to pretend that I'm doing cool shit
good luck
>>344880714
depth of field looks like fucking garbage and hurts my eyes.
What a load of shit you've just written.
>>344882272
Shadows are also far from how they work in real life, do you disable them too? Moron.
>>344882507
>defending something as retarded as DoF this hard because other stuff makes it happen as well
At the end of the day it still looks like shit
>>344882572
>hurts my eyes.
Retards with disabilities, your opinions don't matter.
>>344882614
I gave you reasoning why it's done. You're free to reject that reasoning. Just don't expect too much empathy from developers
>>344882587
>also
So you concede video game motion blur is far from how motion looks in real life? Great! Good talk anon
>>344882257
>I want to pretend that I'm doing cool shit
In cutscenes? Fucking idiot.
>>344882587
I've heard people on /v/ complain about soft shadows and contact hardening shadows as "unrealistic" and claiming that shadows from stencil or shadowbuffer are more realistic, so I wouldn't be surprised.
>>344882507
>cinematography
To be fair the effect is falling out a favor (along with shaky cam thank fucking god)
>>344882807
I've already said it's inaccurate like all other graphical effects. You are quite the illiterate little chimp.
>>344882905
Oops meant to green text "deep focus is a thing"
I always disable any post processing shit.
Anti Aliasing and Anisotropic Filter(Forced by NVCP) are always a priority.
Everything else I can compromise.
AA and AF can make any game look good, sharp and clean.
>>344883000
Well, yes, deep focus is a thing in cinema.
>>344882905
It's a tool. And still very useful in specific situations, but the creators learned when not to use it. Games will, in time. They're still in their fad phase, regarding some effects.
That said, you did mean to greentext deep focus? After all, in games that's effectively "no DoF", which is what people seem to largely prefer, and is almost mandatory in interactive environments (because you can not control where on the screen the player will look)
>>344877118
Red Orchestra 2 also has unbelievably shitty AO, so it's not like it's an isolated problem.
No AA, low motion blur, DoF off.
Why the fuck was DoF ever created is my question?
>"Hey here's an option when turned ON makes anything 15 feet away from you look like shit!"
>>344875389
>In most games it gives an unnatural black halo to everything
That's called SSAO, HBAO+ doesn't have that issue
>>344883159
I think it's funny how certain post processing effects have a fad phase where they're overused and poorly implemented then over time devs learn to use them properly, only for them to be surpassed by the newest poorly implemented fad.
At least bloom nowadays is mostly used properly.
>>344882968
You have? My interpretation of your argument is "it happens in real life". Sounds like you are just moving the goalposts because your stance is indefensible
>>344883070
I fucked it all up, what I meant to say is deep/shallow focus while a thing (esp for recent action movies) is falling out of favor.
>>344883159
Yeah, see >>344883000. DoF makes zero sense during gameplay until we have eye tracking but even if we had perfect eye tracking tech i'd still rather just have a clear image on my screen. Even a super well made movie (for example Lost in Translation) that uses tons of deep/shallow focus shots makes me wish the filmmakers would chill the fuck out with it.
>>344883323
>Why the fuck was DoF ever created
it's a pixel shader effect, and someone went "I wonder if I can do this?" Don't hate the tool, hate the idiot using it wrongly
>>344883395
>certain post processing effects
make that ALL post processing effects and ALL effects in general. That's how tech goes. Someone comes up with it, everybody is fascinated and overuses it, sometimes terribly. Eventually it becomes so common, people come to their sense and apply it responsibly.
Only problem video games are , tech moving so quickly, devs are currently chasing several dozen fads
>>344883246
Good thing you can replace it though.
>>344882893
If they're misapplied, they can definitely be more immersion-breaking than stencil shadows.
>>344883404
>DoF makes zero sense during gameplay
I did not suggest it during gameplay. In fact in >>344881579 I specifically added the cutscenes qualifier, for a reason
>>344883246
>Using ingame AO
>EVER
If you got a Nvidia you should nearly always just use the Driver based HBAO+ except the game got support for it itself
I disable DoF 100% of the time if possible. No exceptions. DoF is a fucking bullshit effect that exists to either hide low-res textures or to mimic how movie cameras/your eyeballs work, which is completely goddamn pointless.
Motion blur I disable... maybe 95% of the time. I've seen maybe one or two instances where it doesn't look like total ass, but more often than not it's meant just to hide shitty textures (again) or mimic a FLAW in movie cameras, which is even worse than pointless. It's obnoxious and represents a refusal to take advantage of the medium's unique properties. Kind of like lens flare.
>>344883681
Yeah was agreeing with you
Most are completely unnecessary and outright bad. Unless he get the technology to detect were our eyes are looking on the screen and focus the item, DoF will aways be shit
The only that MIGHT be accepted is motion blur in some games, like driving games.
But it is all used on AAA games cause consoles cant into high res texts and AA, so it need cheaper filters to smooth everything up.
>>344880618
>>344881146
Correction:
(Assembler code has changed, results included)
http://pastebin.com/nMBSMCTV
>>344883323
>Why the fuck was DoF ever created is my question?
For cinematics. It's never used properly in-game because it's a very situational effect to make the viewer focus on something, almost every movie uses this. For example, when you get a new weapon in Doom, the point is to look at the weapon so everything around you gets blurry. Also, put a finger in front of your face and focus on it. Everything else will be out of fucs
>>344865274
Just make it optional, preferably with sliders.
Bloom, motion blur and other effects are useful but a lot of people don't like it for whatever reason.
>>344883573
>>344883682
Thanks, guys. I'll check it out. There's nothing worse than 'aura of darkness' AO in games.
>>344883682
>If you got a Nvidia you should nearly always just use the Driver based HBAO+
Games that require compatibility bits look like shit with HBAO+, There's always AO bleeding through fog and other effects
>>344867683
Kind of the point.
>>344866960
Here it's quite clearly being used as a gameplay mechanic, with monsters blood sticking to your gas mask to add more challenge in cqc
>>344884008
I personally use ReShade for all my graphics tweaking solutions whenever ENB isn't available. But driver forced AO isn't bad. Though I'm not on Nvidia so I can't comment on Nvidia's AO solutions.
ReShade gives you more freedom anyway.
>>344867579
frame rate. you'll need hundreds of frames to make it convincing.
using velocity is far more stable and hides stuttering.
>>344875392
are you retarded or blind?
>>344875494
believe it or not your computer cannot simulate real world behaviour of photons at a silky smooth 30fps for large, complex scenes
I guess one argument for determining vertex velocity in object space prior to rendering would be if you're using slow algorithms like ray tracing etc, rendering the static images in the first place already takes a long fucking time and post-processing them for motion blur is yet another step that has to be done and is overkill especially if you're just looking for a single screenshot with motion blur (you'd have to render at minimum one other frame, doubling the rendering time). So if you get movement information in object space you can then modify your rendering algorithm so that a certain number of rays that are missing the moving object in the current frame, that would hit the object in the next or previous frame (that's not being rendered), are assumed to hit the object, and vice-versa (excluding rays that are hitting the object right now but missing it in subsequent frames).
>>344876007
Im 26 and have been gaming since the days of Super Nintendo. Cry more faggot, its not my fault your faulty genetics cursed you with shitty eye sight and that you have to wear glasses
>>344884643
>for large, complex scenes
where "large" is more than a handful pixels and "complex" is more than a solid cube
>>344877937
>FXAA isn't that bad
I'm actually laughing right now
>>344865274
I also like it even for FPSes
Just make it real subtle. It need to be activated for all objects too, not just a camera blur.
>>344884916
what's camera blur?
How do you "activate" motion blur?
>>344878083
you don't get a constant flowing image from a screen numb nuts
>>344884652
That would only be useful in static rendering, in real time rendering this is completely useless, not only does nobody use GI in games, but there's no point in calculating extremely accurate motion blur when fake solutions do a good enough job already.
Crysis 3, Battlefield 4, Star Wars Battlefront and Metro Last Light had amazing per-object motion blur solutions.
>>344884858
It is if you're not a retard. But apparently, you are a retard.
FXAA has evolved since it's creation, the last versions of FXAA, when properly configured can even resemble SMAA results if done properly.
>>344884989
Camera blur is whole screen motion blur, object motion blur is a different form of motion blur.
Compare the motion blur in Battlefield 3 to the one in Battlefield 4 or Metro Last Light.
I'm sure you can find videos online.
>>344885149
>Camera blur is whole screen motion blur, object motion blur is a different form of motion blur.
none of this makes any sense
>>344885282
Let's see if I can find examples and put toghether a comparison image to explain what I mean, it's hard to explain and english is not my native language.
>>344885149
Oh I agree about the realtime and static images thing, I was just thinking out loud, so to speak. I recently did some research into realtime global illumination for uni and it can't be much longer until we see Path Tracing in real time applications like video games. Maybe motion blur generated in object space might lead to even better results in the future when it's a viable solution in terms of computing time; obviously a lot of people aren't happy with the current algorithms.
>>344885618
I'm also into these things and work doing 3d rendering, and honestly unless you're on a super big studio with a huge budget and crazy render farms you're not going to look into getting perfect accuracy when calculating these sorts of things for your renders, even a medium studio will prioritize render times and tone down the quality and samples of stuff like motion blur when static rendering.
I think what we need is faster, not more accurate, algorithms.
I don't know when exactly video games and real time rendering will catch up to static rendering, but I'd imagine soon.
>>344885282
Some games blur the entire goddamn screen when you turn around, which makes it impossible to see until you stop moving your mouse. Some games only blur moving objects within the frame.
>>344885618
per vertex velocity is sufficient data. It approximates the motion of the whole frame duration as a straight line for each vertex. For high enough framerates that approximation is mighty close to reality. How that data is translated into an image might still have space for improvements.
I mean, you can do a lot of stuff that's more exact, but you got to keep in mind the ROI. If an algorithm an order of magnitude more complex produces barely any visual difference, it's just not worth it in a realtime environment.
Anything that requires eye tracking to work properly is awful shit that I always turn off. This is usually DoF and motion blur.
Since DoF works off where the crosshair's pointing, my character may generally be facing a nearby object, but I can still look beyond it with my eyes (without changing my head's direction), except it's all blurred to fuck with DoF because it can't tell where you're looking.
Same thing with motion blur, if something's moving, yeah it'll blur, but if you watch it move (i.e. track it with your eyes) then it won't blur. Yet, again, with motion blur after effects it'll just blur any moving object regardless.
Probably been said already but this thread is hueg and fuck reading it all.
>>344885847
these are two independent effects, that can (and should) be used together. They can also be expressed using the exact same vertex velocity. Only it happens to be uniform during a camera rotation, and affect a few vertices when an object moves. Such a solution is preferred, because it cuts down on special cases
>>344885846
>I think what we need is faster, not more accurate, algorithms.
doing it faster is brute forcing the solution. You can brute force everything, but it's kind of boring
>when exactly video games and real time rendering will catch up to static rendering
never. non-realtime always has the performance advantage. Diminishing returns may pop up sooner or later, but I'm confident at any moment it'll be trivial to produce a scene that will completely fall apart under realtime conditions
>>344885282
Pretty sure he means something like this.
Been turning these effects off as long as I can remember.
Your example of Crysis 1 is perfect. The depth of field when aiming the gun, the horrible motion blur. None of it looks good. It's unnecessary and only reduces the quality of the overall picture.
They're all a waste of processing power since they have to constantly adjust to the image, plus I want to see what's on screen not smear it.
>>344886021
Nobody should blur the entire screen just because the player is doing a 180. Not in any FPS at least.
>>344865274
I fucking despise both motion blur and depth of field. It's stupid synthetic shit that your eyes do for you already.
>>344886353
>I want to see what's on screen
what's on the screen is the sum of a world transform, a rasterizer, several hundred shaders and off-screen renders, composite effects and post processing, to form one complete image. For some reason people consider everything before the last bit "what's on the screen"
>>344886201
Saved for next time, thanks anon.
>>344886398
when the player is doing a 180 a lot of things on screen are moving very fast. Sounds like a reasonable target for motion blur, it being a very fast motion and all that. Keep in mind that it ends the moment you stop turning, so it's not like you lose anything of value
>>344886505
Post processing is content agnostic, isn't that why?
>>344871516
OP, please dont fall for this bait
>>344886639
Not all post processing is like that.
>>344886639
it's what? It's part of the pipeline to turn the game data into visuals. Post processing is not done by some third party. It's the exact same developer that did all the other things before. For some games it's part of their distinct style even, like tinting for games like Deus Ex Human Resources or Need For Speed More Wagons. That's post processing.
Screenshaking, overlays (including marker overlays for items or objects of interest), that's all post processing, stuff done to the rendered 2D image. You could say with deferred lighting the vast majority of the very output is post processing, as it acts almost completely in 2D.
It's not even a statement on the quality or lack of quality for specific post processing effects. I'll leave that to the shouty anons. It just puzzles me a bit that this particular step of the pipeline is getting shit on, and not considered part of the game's output
>>344885846
Oh for sure, right now they're prioritizing render times. Just saying, hardware keeps getting better especially in the professional sector so algorithms that were once slow can now run in real time. Should be possible to implement ray casting on a CPU with a low enough resolution (720p should be possible I reckon, if you're not looking to compute other stuff alongside). Where are you from, anon?
>>344885905
Depends on the application. In games where it's mostly eye candy it doesn't really matter but if you're trying to say, spoof a moon landing convincingly, you need the best renderer you can get.
>>344887197
I'm from Spain.
>>344886613
It means the player has to slow to a stop before they can start aiming again.
In real life your brain has mechanisms that compensate for eye motion-induced blur, it's called saccadic masking.
>>344865274
I cant stand it because it makes shit artificially blurry. Which is stupid, at high speed, you need that extra visual clarity to survey your surroundings and ensure you do not crash and notice oncoming hazards and obstacles.
IF I wanted to challenge myself with blurry ass graphics, I would play the game at 480i.
>>344887197
>Should be possible to implement ray casting on a CPU with a low enough resolution (720p should be possible I reckon, if you're not looking to compute other stuff alongside)
realtime raytracing at this resolution has been done about a decade ago
http://www.q3rt.de/
On beefy hardware realtime raytracing is heavily used in industrial design, as they rely on realistic reflections.
It just can't compete with a fat rasterizer and a shitload of approximate shaders, and the latter just looks good enough
>you need the best renderer you can get.
if you can make it just as convincing for less (money, or computing power, whatever), it's the reasonable thing to do.
leave it to the spergs to turn an potentially interesting thread into a shit flinging spectacle
never change you colossal faggots
>>344865274
If you make a game run at 60fps there's no need for blur.
Adding blur to something updating less frequently makes it look like a pile of arse.
>>344887262
Germany here.
It's good to see some other anons on fucking /v/ who are actually knowledgeable about the nuts and bolts of video games. I'm getting tired of people crying bloody murder about SJW and anti SJW shit in games, but they don't know what phong shading or a fucking z buffer are.
>>344887568
> can't compete again, depends on what you're looking for. An industrial designer might argue that a scanline renderer can't hold a candle to the Photon Tracing his beefy workstation is using.
Is the demo scene still a thing? I always found it cool what they achieved with simple hardware and hacking shit in languages that weren't "click here to add instant lighting".
>>344887403
>It means the player has to slow to a stop before they can start aiming again.
not like they can aim in motion. The very action of aiming is getting the crosshair onto a target. During that time, the target will exhibit no motion blur, by definition.
>In real life your brain has mechanisms that compensate for eye motion-induced blur
accepted, though I'm not sure just how powerful it is when the viewport is restricted.
That said, it sounds like motion blur would suffer the same issue as DoF, the human body can override it, so a screen effect is going to collide with that. The only solution would indeed be to bruteforce the whole thing, pumping 300+ fps through a screen and let the brain sort it out
>>344884643
Believe it or not there are levels of "false realism" that look ugly and uncanny-valley. That sensation of uncanny-valley, and the opinion that it is ugly, is subjective and idiosyncratic. This entire thread is subjective. Bitching about people having opinions is fucking pathetic.
>>344887835
>again, depends on what you're looking for
which part of my post confused you?
>On beefy hardware realtime raytracing is heavily used in industrial design, as they rely on realistic reflections.
motion blur literally only makes sense in racing games
when modern devs include it in stuff that absolutely does not benefit from it then it just tells me there's a lot of incompetence in the industry still when it pertains to computer graphics
>>344887835
Thanks, I've always had an interest in graphics.
I first got into this stuff with modding computer games then jumped into learning programming and 3d rendering, now I work doing 3d rendering at a studio and shit. I never was big into programming for graphics though, as I'm not a very good programmer and I always was more of the artsy guy anyway, I've been into the development of ReShade and ENB shaders, but never published anything, and at best only did tweaks or edits with the help of actual programmers.
I did though massively enjoy using these shaders actual programmers made and tweaking them and just screenshotting everything in all ways imaginable.
I also did learn some game development, and when I did some videogames with colleagues I worked on the visuals mostly.
I wish I knew more GLSL and could program my own complex shaders, but oh well. I'll get to learning it some other time.
Also demoscene is still a thing.
>>344887714
>If you make a game run at 60fps there's no need for blur.
Why do you say that? Do you think our eyes don't see more than 60fps? What about high speed motion for which even 60fps is not enough, e.g. spinning wheels, helicopter blades, etc.?
>>344887568
Path tracing is the future.
http://on-demand.gputechconf.com/gtc/2016/video/S6750.html
>>344887936
The thing is, saccadic masking only kicks in when you begin an eye movement. Swinging a mouse doesn't cut it, so when you blur my entire screen you're effectively blinding me for the duration. In fast-paced FPS games where the player is constantly moving and looking around, the whole screen should never be blurred. In fact I have no clue how people managed to survive the effect in Doom 4, which is very fast-paced.
>>344865274
I only disable motion blur if it ruins the overall image or if it's particularly noticeable
The motion blur in Uncharted 4, for example, was absolutely terrible and very heavy
>>344887936
>not like they can aim in motion
HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAAH
oh man this is the most retarded thing i read all week, kudos.
>>344888294
>Swinging a mouse doesn't cut it, so when you blur my entire screen you're effectively blinding me for the duration
Just so we're clear here: the blur should cover the transition between two frames, not more. Nobody's talking about a big swirl of color bullshit.
When you say the compensation does not help anyway, you might as well apply motion blur to keep the motion smooth. You're not gonna be blinded by it in any meaningful way. Remember, you'll slow down for aiming anyway. a frame or two of slow movement means no blur, simple as that.
>>344888059
You said it can't compete with a fast rasterizer as if that was universal truth, but both have their applications and downfalls. A scanline renderer might be "good enough" for fast paced games, but in other applications it won't suffice.
I'm an EE and it would be hella wicked if we could accurately model electromagnetic fields (including the light field) in real time. Overkill for vidya, great stuff for research in all sorts of engineering.
>>344888176
I currently work in the opposite of computer graphics, programming computer vision algorithms for an institute (or I should be, instead of sitting at my pc writing up autistic shit for /v/ and overstaying for an hour lel).
But demos have always interested me even though I didn't closely follow them and researching into rendering algorithms for this module (1st semester of master studies) rekindled that interest.
>>344888689
>You said it can't compete with a fast rasterizer as if that was universal truth
You're being a misleading piece of shit right now. I quoted what else I said in the post. If you want to ignore context, off yourself
I turn off:
Motion Blur
Chromatic Abberation
Crepescular Rays
Bloom
FXAA
Depth of Field
Vigette
At any chance I get so I can actually see things and read text. They almost never look realistic, are often way overdone, and cost too much performance. Ambient Occlusion is pretty heavy too.
>>344888857
Calm down friend.
You said ray tracing is heavily used and then literally said scanline is good enough, implying raytracing to be overkill under any circumstances. I just wanted to stress that a distinction should be made.
>>344865274
Anyone know if you can turn motion blurr off in gta v?
>>344889214
>implying
off yourself, shithead, right fucking now. I even said why raytracing is used in some situations and you chose to ignore it just to "correct" someone. You're the lowest piece of trash imaginable on this very thread right now and I wish you nothing but the worst. It's assholes like you that drag this board down, with their utter bullshit and senseless desire to constantly argue over shit nobody, absolutely nobody with a braincell or two would even consider a problem.
No, I will not calm, and you're not a friend, not even remotely. You're a disgusting piece of trash that's an insult to this board, this internet, and this very plane of fucking existence. Go eat a bullet, right fucking now.
>>344889530
You seem upset.
> go eat a bullet
I can't, Germany has noguns.
>>344889167
>Crepuscular rays
>bloom
>fxaa
>depth of field
But why
Rays are just a cool addon
Bloom softens the light and it bleeds on other props realistically most of the time
Depth of field is simply realistic, it's how your eyes work
>>344865274
Seeing stuff in the distance all blurry and shit fucking sucks real life. Nobody should artificially recreate it in vidya, even moreso since its just a cheap cop-out for lazy devs who didn't bother making the environment look good and just blur that shit out
>>344889978
>Seeing stuff in the distance all blurry and shit fucking sucks real life
have you considered glasses?
>>344888176
>that chromatic aberration
disgusting
>>344889978
Foreyes.com
>>344889742
>Bloom softens the light and it bleeds on other props realistically most of the time
In your image it just looks like a layer of vaseline.
>>344890194
I like it.
>>344889742
>Depth of field is simply realistic, it's how your eyes work
Not him but how it is implemented is not how our eyes work.
Our eyes move independently of our head but they don't in video games so you have that irritating DOF where anything not at the same distance as whatever your crosshair is over is blurry and the transition is virtually impossible to do smoothly because you don't really know what the player is intending to look at while they are moving the crosshair.
I don't mind some implementations myself, e.g. scripted DOF in cutscenes, anything in the distance is DOF blurred unless you use some zoom function in which case foreground is blurred and distant becomes clear. I might be alone in that last one because it's how the world is to me all the time anyway, my eyes are shit now, but I do remember what it was like to see properly.
>>344889530
Found the shitter with no emotional intelligence.
>>344883336
It does. Less noticable, but HBAO is still completely physically incorrect and useless as AO emulation.
>>344890795
>useless
Be more hyperbolic, retard.
DoF can look cool in screenshots.
>>344871935
Ironically, WiiU games, Mario Kart 8 especially relies heavily on blur to hide the disgusting lack of any AA whatsoever
>>344891013
i agree but that looks like shit
>>344889167
>disliking godrays
Though it can be done poorly, like in Watch Dogs. Most of the time, especially recently, it looks nice, at least I think so.
>>344865274
I turn that shit off immediately and don't even touch games where I can't.
It's annoying, makes me play worse, reduces my awareness of my surroundings, and generally looks like shit.
>>344891013
>pic unrelated
>>344891034
No it doesn't. Nintendo is so far behind that they still don't have motion blur, which is why the manchildren on this board still hate it.
>>344890914
ANY camera movement completely fucks up all HBAO "shadows" and forces them to change. Anyone with a shred of taste will not tolerate this shit.
>>344891437
That is completely false, you must really like playing with fullbright lighting and eating shit.
>>344865836
This times 1000. I'd rather have no AA than fxaa, it makes textures look blurry as balls. I'm aware dx11 doesn't have the same AA as dx9, but txaa or smaa with lunasharpening makes dx11 games look so much better than fxaa
>>344891798
Txaa is many times more blurry than fxaa.
>>344891941
Yeah but I'm a clueless parrot who only saw hate for fxaa
>>344890386
>>344890105
Yeah, I use glasses already, I was just pointing out that trying to see a sign a distance away without them sucks
>>344891941
No with luna sharpening added. Download reshade and take any txaa game and apply 2.5-3.0 lunasharpening and it takes away almost all the blurriness while leaving textures crisp and AAd
>>344892848
Not*
only motion blur I find exceptional are Doom (2016)'s and MGSV:TPP's
>>344892848
Great, so you've gone from blurry textures to sharpen artifacts. It's a different shade of looks bad.
>>344892848
Lumasharpen can not add detail.
Using blurry AA with sharpening worsens the image quality overall.
>>344893196
Isn't dead space dx9? I'm specifically referring to dx11 only games, since apparently no true AA techniques exist outside post processing such as fxaa. Dx9 games have much more accurate anti aliasing techniques and don't need luna/pixel sharpening imo
If it wasn't for camera artifacts ore super jagged lines in games like gtav, I'd perfer to play dx11 games with no AA. But alas, dx11 games usually look way to jagged/stair steppy with no AA enabled.
>>344891574
Go suck a dick.
Also, i hate SSAO techniques exactly because i dont want a proper fucking AO emulation there are tons of different tricks to emulate indirect lighting, but tastless hacks now think that SSAO now got them covered.
>>344893196
But I do agree, txaa even with lunasharpening has nothing on dx9 AA. Smaa can sometimes look better in dx11 than txaa, but in a lot of games causes a lot of shimmering and artifacts
>>344865274
i disabled motion blur in doom. it sickens me somehow
>>344893623
It doesn-t matter that DS is DX9 if Im not using any AA methods specific to it, that screenshot is SMAA and downsampling.
>>344891941
Yeah, I noted this recently when playing NFS. Going from FXAA to TAA removed all aliasing but the image became much blurrier.
>>344893703
>he considers this negligible and unnoticeable thing to be "completely fucked up shadows"
Kill yourself you autistic piece of shit.
>>344893814
SMAA, when properly configured, is miles ahead of TXAA.
See this image? This is with SMAA.
>>344894110
>4K
No wonder a bit of PPAA is enough to rub out anythig the resolution hasn't taken care of.
Give us a native 1080p screenshot with SMAA instead.
>Already need glasses
Why would I enable something that not only hinders my ability to see, but greatly exagerates it too?
>mmmuh visuals
Some games do post-processing well... but for the most part looks like bubblegum, plastic shit
>>344865274
i remove motion blur, CrmAbj, and bloom. HDR/CC can stay if it doesn't bake in bloom or fogging or anything. SSAO is usually a hit to frames for little impact, but it can look amazing. DoF depends on the game but i usually turn it off, it's usually cheap as fuck PS3-looking DoF with cheap as fuck default Photoshop-looking motion blur, in video games.
motion blur and a very tight, point-focused DoF, with mouselook at 1080+, is a big no no in most cases. it makes a bit more sense at 720/900p on a gamepad because the scene looks like shit anyway, you may as well focus on the player's look-point only and look speed is slower on a pad.
>>344894065
Well, why even use SSAO if its so negligible and unnoticeable?
>>344894257
Sure. Got many.
>>344894648
The artifact you're referring to is unnoticeable, idiot. HBAO on/off is a world of difference, and you must have extreme shit taste if you aren't bothered by unshadowed areas.
>>344894756
This is only with SMAA, I assume. Looks good. We should do a comparison of No AA, SMAA and 8xSSAA though, in order to properly see how it affect the image.
>>344895043
I dont have comparisons at hand, but my SMAA settings are really good, many people and ENB configs use them.
Properly configured SMAA is all you need, the only thing it might ever struggle with is something like power lines, and even then the reuslts are pretty good.
>>344865274
disabled blur
no shadows if posible
and the less deep of field possible
I just wanna play the game , not going all "muh le inmersion" meme
>>344895169
On the subject of post-process anti-aliasing, I wish more games would use CMAA which, in my opinion, is the best looking PPAA. Unfortunately it's a proprietary Intel technology.
>>344894891
Entire SSAO is an artifact, it doesnt take lighting into calculations at all. It creates shadows where they dont belong and does fuckall where AO is actually needed.
>if you aren't bothered by unshadowed areas.
Maybe you should actually read my fucking posts?
>i want a proper fucking AO emulation. There are tons of different tricks to emulate indirect lighting and shadows, but tastless hacks now think that SSAO now got them covered.
>>344895375
Here you can see on power lines what I mean.
SMAA still struggles with those, but besides that its a perfect low cost solution for AA.
And it works on any game.
>>344889742
>Depth of field is simply realistic, it's how your eyes work
and they can do that on their own.
Assuming my eyes are glued to the center of the screen is fucking retarded, and that's what every single depth of field implementation does.
>>344895837
>And it works on any game.
Yup, even on games where it's not natively implement through an injector. It's a blessing, especially when driver-forced MSAA/SSAA doesn't work.
>>344895690
Too fucking bad that's what you want. HBAO+ is the best thing we got so far and it's a huge improvement over nothing, calling it shit and worthless because it's not as accurate as you wish it was is absolutely fucking retarded.
I seriously have no idea what's going on through your thick fucking skull.
>>344879493
>tfw I have 80-110MB screenshots because of 10K resolution.
Post processing does more good than harm, but FXAA isn't my cup of tea.
>>344896637
>taking 10k screenshots of shit tier 2006 graphics
Why
>>344896806
I like taking screenshots, that's why.
>>344894002
Txaa is not the same as TAA,
>>344896637
>10k
You're just a child.
Watch this.
15k succ on your GPU
>>344897034
Take screenshots of something impressive
>>344897196
I need a space cowboy adult?
>>344897329
I don't really have much since I'm limited by Memeforce GTX 3.5GB.
>>344897559
Isolation looks so good.
>>344897196
how do I make my games work at this kind of res? I tried downsampling from 8k but everything just crashed
>>344897870
Simple answer: you don't
Object motion blur is okay if done right. FEAR 2's a decent example.
>>344896139
> is the best thing we got so far
>what is lightmaps
>what is field shadows
>what is field AO
Not even mentioning VXAO or dynamic AO
>>344884127
It's not the monster blood man, it's the fact that everything is so god damn full of artifact, that's it's just a moving blob of something
>>344897741
Not only that but it runs sooo good as well.
I'm using the xml mod while increasing following:
Shadow res: 16384
LOD: 32 (default is like 0.5 to 2 or something.
https://a.pomf.cat/mjwojb.png (Too large for 56k 4chan.
>>344899190
Shadow res is stupid to be that high, useless.
LOD is good though.
It's better to increase reflections than shadows.
16k shadows is a waste, game has contact hardening shadows and soft shadows anyway.
>>344899316
Shadow res didn't change performance when I went from 8192->16384 so I kept it.
Reflections are already crystal clear due to the mod making planar reflections reflect better.
The main problem with DOF in games right now is the pixel size bokeh blur. In most cases the blur is just too big for what it's trying to hide. The best example I can think of is JC and it's distance bokeh. In 1080p it justs fucking horrible with it's general heat haze shimmer. But once you put it to 2160p dsr/vsr the size of the blur has halfed and it now looks like a decent distance blur,
Motion blur suffer from something similar where the blur size is too large and it doesn't work at low frame rates. Sure it hide a low frame rate, but it takes too long to resolve itself to a non-blurred state giving the objects/screen a laggy fuzz for too long.
In short we need much higher pixel densities and frame rates for these effects to look better. Not that there's a decent use for dof outside of trailers and cut scenes until we get decent eye tracking.
>>344874854
a high framerate
>>344899823
Well, if the framerate doesn't drop I guess it's fine, but really 16k shadows is overkill as heck.
![[002341].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/TmOClXH.jpg "[002341]")
