Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dynamic shadows artifacts

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • replied
    Originally posted by Gwenn View Post
    Lightmass is for static lighting, this is a dynamic lighting issue that's completely unrelated to static lighting.
    Linked thread indicates that Lightmass 2.0 could be RTGI and that can surely bring us more changes and new implementions then just a new lighting solution.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Lightmass is for static lighting, this is a dynamic lighting issue that's completely unrelated to static lighting.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    I belive it may be because of "Lightmass 2.0".

    https://forums.unrealengine.com/deve...ngines-unigine

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by littl3_4ngel View Post
    wao so it's a good news!! hope that EPIC solve this definitively!!!
    I wouldn't hold my breath, Epic is great at talking about features and things they are "working" on, and then they just get backlogged for a few years.

    Let's not praise them just yet, before they actually fix this. Especially after keeping silent about this issue for over two years now.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    wao so it's a good news!! hope that EPIC solve this definitively!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by Zeblote View Post
    Please don't tell me the "more advanced" solution is ray tracing..
    I think they will use denoise code on top, but won't use ray tracing at all.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Please don't tell me the "more advanced" solution is ray tracing..

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by Zeblote View Post
    So, since epic doesn't seem to care about this, has anyone tried implementing this slope bias thing? It can't be the most complex thing in the world right?
    I did get reply to my workaround PR.
    Thank you for your contribution to the Engine. One of our engineers updated the internal tracking ticket for this pull request and noted that we are currently working on a more advanced solution for this same issue. -Tim

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    So, since epic doesn't seem to care about this, has anyone tried implementing this slope bias thing? It can't be the most complex thing in the world right?

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Same problem for me, makes the landscapes look faceted.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by IOchair View Post
    I mean . If shadow filter work back in 4.13 , what happened to it in 4.14 ? Maybe we can figure it out by comparing the shadow filter side by side ?
    It didnt work in 4.13. The 4.13 settings make less noticeable artifacts in engine default scenes. But the problem was equally evident when you put something more than a sphere in an empty scene with a directional light.

    As some users said, the solution is a shadow slope based bias integration in the shadow calculation.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    I mean . If shadow filter work back in 4.13 , what happened to it in 4.14 ? Maybe we can figure it out by comparing the shadow filter side by side ?

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Having the same issue =/

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Bump, because it's still not fixed and no progress seems to be made whatsoever.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by ConverseFox View Post

    You're taking this out of context. I'm not talking about marketplace/launcher support/UI nor account problems/security. I completely agree those things need more attention from EPIC.

    I'm strictly talking about anybody who downloaded the engine completely free expecting a responses/acknowledgment from EPIC regarding the engine/project support. Be it from these forums, answerhub, or through email. There are a lot of people using the engine without having spent a single cent on it. Expecting responses/acknowledgment is what I mean by premium support, and EPIC just can't guarantee that to all those people. There is a reason UDN exists. You can't just assume there's not enough people emailing them to warrant the equivalent of premium support.

    EDIT: This is a good example of how EPIC views UDN and Answerhub (the forum should probably be grouped in with the Answerhub since it's also available to everyone). Link with a timestamp at 40 minutes 51 seconds: https://youtu.be/2edoacF53F0?t=2451

    The problem its not the money. The problem is the extreme lack of basic documentation of UE4 compared to other engines. And by the way, I should say that unreal its a overcomplicated engine. Very rigid internally, but trying to be flexible on the exterior.

    BTW, how to access UDN?
    Last edited by II_ADN_II; 02-27-2019, 01:57 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X