NVIDIA GameWorks Integration

[Sitrec]

woa wait. Is Turf coming too? O.O

Yes! Check out the answers in this thread, there have been various discussions about it. Couldn't be more excited!

[gboxentertainment]

ok, so with the latest vxgi build, I've figured out a few more things.

When distance field shadows are turned on (for spotlights), the shadow isn't voxelized. I am assuming that this has something to do with shadow depth maps deactivated or not used when distance field shadows are turned on. I have searched through the code and cannot find anything that fixes this. Cubemap shadows seem to be a completely different story.

Particles aren't getting vxgi because they are translucent - i don't think translucent materials are covered by vxgi yet. Also they don't contribute to the vxgi (they're not voxelized) because they're screen space?

I'm hoping that one day, we will be able to achieve this again [Source: Unreal Engine 4 2012 Walkthrough]:

[Mike.Skolones]

ok, so with the latest vxgi build, I've figured out a few more things.

When distance field shadows are turned on (for spotlights), the shadow isn't voxelized. I am assuming that this has something to do with shadow depth maps deactivated or not used when distance field shadows are turned on. I have searched through the code and cannot find anything that fixes this. Cubemap shadows seem to be a completely different story.

Particles aren't getting vxgi because they are translucent - i don't think translucent materials are covered by vxgi yet. Also they don't contribute to the vxgi (they're not voxelized) because they're screen space?

I'm hoping that one day, we will be able to achieve this again [Source: Unreal Engine 4 2012 Walkthrough]:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]27015[/ATTACH]

Hi,

I've been discussing the shadow issues with one of the VXGI engineers, and he thinks he sees what is going on, and believes he has a fix for it. We'll try to get it in there ASAP, but please understand that this is a very busy week with preparation for GDC.

One thing I've noticed lately is that it is becoming more and more of a challenge to keep up with all of the substantial support issues raised here, because the discussion gets mixed in with general questions, and the threads are all intertwined. I think it would make sense to move this shadow issue, and any other big topics, over to the 'issues' feature on Github (https://github.com/NvPhysX/UnrealEngine/issues ). Would this work for you? If you are willing, please summarize your findings on shadows with point lights, spot lights, etc., as an issue, and then I'll see if I can get the VXGI engineers to participate directly. You might separate out translucency and particles into separate issues, if that makes sense to you.

It is a bit inefficient for me to act as intermediary, I think we can make progress much more quickly if we organize the conversation. What do you think?

Thanks,
Mike

[Mikand79]

But please keep announcing new integrations.

[Gandosh]

Yes! Check out the answers in this thread, there have been various discussions about it. Couldn't be more excited!

Woa man. Unbelievable! Awesome!
---------------------------------------
umm... faceworks? xD

[Mike.Skolones]

From what I can see in our UE4 integration group here at NV, Hair Works will probably the next out the door, and with any luck we'll be uploading it to Github soon after GDC.

However Turf is starting to take shape too, and I'd like to open a discussion here that will guide our efforts, so that the integration works well from day one.

To start, would anyone like to post screenshots here of typical scenes where you are using conventional UE4 features to plant grass, and could you describe the workflow considerations? For example, are you generating grass procedurally?

Thanks,
Mike

[Mike.Skolones]

Woa man. Unbelievable! Awesome!
---------------------------------------
umm... faceworks? xD

Is that a vote for FW integration?

[Nudlegaru]

From what I can see in our UE4 integration group here at NV, Hair Works will probably the next out the door, and with any luck we'll be uploading it to Github soon after GDC.

However Turf is starting to take shape too, and I'd like to open a discussion here that will guide our efforts, so that the integration works well from day one.

To start, would anyone like to post screenshots here of typical scenes where you are using conventional UE4 features to plant grass, and could you describe the workflow considerations? For example, are you generating grass procedurally?

Thanks,
Mike

Someone made a grass system in UE4, it may interest you: https://forums.unrealengine.com/show...The-wind-blows

[Gandosh]

Is that a vote for FW integration?

if there isn't any vote on that. Yes I just cant believe im getting all this crazy stuff. I think i have to delay my cinematic video for this =D

[Mike.Skolones]

if there isn't any vote on that. Yes I just cant believe im getting all this crazy stuff. I think i have to delay my cinematic video for this =D

Sure, consider that a vote counted. We are in favor of releasing FaceWorks, but we have limited budget of time and people, so we have had to prioritize according to demand and other considerations. I'll inquire as to how much lead time we need to get the FaceWorks integration polished and published.
--Mike

[Cube2222]

Hi,
One thing I've noticed lately is that it is becoming more and more of a challenge to keep up with all of the substantial support issues raised here, because the discussion gets mixed in with general questions, and the threads are all intertwined. I think it would make sense to move this shadow issue, and any other big topics, over to the 'issues' feature on Github (https://github.com/NvPhysX/UnrealEngine/issues ). Would this work for you? If you are willing, please summarize your findings on shadows with point lights, spot lights, etc., as an issue, and then I'll see if I can get the VXGI engineers to participate directly. You might separate out translucency and particles into separate issues, if that makes sense to you.

It is a bit inefficient for me to act as intermediary, I think we can make progress much more quickly if we organize the conversation. What do you think?
Thanks,
Mike

Gonna put this into the first post, and edit it a little bit to make it more descriptive about this threads purpouse.

EDIT: Is turbulence planned before, or after faceworks?

[The_Distiller]

@Mike: I don't wanna pester you too much, but could you check on the specular model used by HairWorks, please?

[Mike.Skolones]

@Mike: I don't wanna pester you too much, but could you check on the specular model used by HairWorks, please?

Sorry for dragging my feet on this. I'll ask someone right now, before I forget again.

Do you have any particular requirements in mind? Which specular model do you prefer?

[Mike.Skolones]

Gonna put this into the first post, and edit it a little bit to make it more descriptive about this threads purpouse.

EDIT: Is turbulence planned before, or after faceworks?

Hrm. Hard to say. What's the difference between 'planning' and 'seeing which one comes across the finish line first' ?

I think Turbulence might make it before FaceWorks. We have a solid integration in-house, but it's on 4.4 and needs to be updated. Last time I tried I gave up quickly, but I need to get back to it. Also, we have a new Turbulence version coming out, with dynamic grids instead of static, plus fuel and temperature terms to make fireballs. The volumetric rendering is still a ways out though.

--Mike

[The_Distiller]

As for the hair spec, I would suggest the Marschner model:

http://www.cs.cornell.edu/~srm/publi.../SG03-hair.pdf


Followed by the Kajiya-Kay model, which was just recently used by "The Order 1886" very successfully I think:

From page 33:
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1020162...t-Gen-Material