Hl2 Hdr

from what i've heard, hl2 will support ps2.0 pseudo-hdr but won't support the superior openexr hdr.
 
Any screenies to show the difference between em ? I'm really curious if it makes a big difference..
 
it should be in the final game as its in the CS:S beta now. it looks really awesome, and it seems to run really well with high settings on my system.
 
Emret said:
Any screenies to show the difference between em ? I'm really curious if it makes a big difference..
Click to expand...

No game uses both. I can provide some screens of what OpenEXR can offer though:

http://www.reflectonreality.com/images/nv40/tim1.jpg
http://www.reflectonreality.com/images/nv40/tim2.jpg
http://www.reflectonreality.com/images/nv40/tim3.jpg
http://www.reflectonreality.com/images/nv40/tim4.jpg
http://www.reflectonreality.com/images/nv40/tim5.jpg

OpenEXR supports ~9000:1 contrast ratio, with ps2.0 the best you can do is ~100:1 afaik
http://common.ziffdavisinternet.com/util_get_image/6/0,1311,sz=1&i=66133,00.jpg
 
you were actually usefull this time instead of bloating nvidia propoganda without any sense

j/k... thnx trans
 
Of course they look like crap. HDR is meant to be seen in motion, not in still frame, as ugly as timmy is the HDR in his demo is kickass. Judging from the HL2 tech demo [I was at E3 at this, that's where I got to see it in action] it's not quite as good as the stuff I've seen in tim's demo [though it was still plently pretty].
 
tranCendenZ said:
No game uses both. I can provide some screens of what OpenEXR can offer though:

http://www.reflectonreality.com/images/nv40/tim1.jpg
http://www.reflectonreality.com/images/nv40/tim2.jpg
http://www.reflectonreality.com/images/nv40/tim3.jpg
http://www.reflectonreality.com/images/nv40/tim4.jpg
http://www.reflectonreality.com/images/nv40/tim5.jpg

OpenEXR supports ~9000:1 contrast ratio, with ps2.0 the best you can do is ~100:1 afaik
http://common.ziffdavisinternet.com/util_get_image/6/0,1311,sz=1&i=66133,00.jpg
Click to expand...

Would be nice to see what it does to a real game instead of demos.
 
R1ckCa1n said:
As will NV40 users to sustain decent fps :p
Click to expand...

LOL it does run just fine on nv 40 :), as explained quite a few times, how much HDR slows down which hardware and why.....
 
R1ckCa1n said:
As will NV40 users to sustain decent fps :p
Click to expand...

Nah its already been confirmed OpenEXR runs fine on NV40 hardware as rancor pointed out above. The Timbury demo I posted screens above uses it heavily and it is very smooth, and devs/testers are saying that it runs smooth in FarCry 1.3 as well.
 
 
the thing about HL2's HDR is that IIRC they are using tone mapped int blending because doing fp blending on hardware that doesn't support it in the framebufffer (all current hardware except the NV4x chips) incurs massive perf hits. (you have to render to texture and do the blend as a PS operation, huge perf drop). this hurts their contrast ratio and blend quality considerably compared to fp blended HDR that is tone mapped to int after blending.
In other words, No HDR< HL2 HDR< RTHDRIBL HDR (uses render to texure and blend in PS) < openexr HDR with FP Framebuffer and FP blending
 
damn merlin you know your shit. well that or you're really good at faking it :cool:

all i know is i like what i saw in that hl2 hdr demo, even if it is a lower quality hdr.
 
oh, HL2's HDR is definately nice when compared to no HDR, but it is still very much a compromise solution so as to allow it to perform well on first generation dx9 hardware. In many less extreme situations there would be little difference between HL2's HDR and an Openexr implementation, but in shots with lots of contrast (extremes of both light and dark at the same time) int tone mapped blending fails to provide the dynamic range needed and openexr excels.
 
in performance, probably, (cut the number of passes) but the quality won't improve unless they change the method of doing it, which would be much more work.
 
Merlin45 said:
in performance, probably, (cut the number of passes) but the quality won't improve unless they change the method of doing it, which would be much more work.
Click to expand...


Quality is alot different sm 3.0 HDR you can use openexr HDR with only 2 passes, anything done on the gpu side is fairly negligable as the gpu is no longer the bottleneck durning game play, HL2 HDR, is similiar to RTHDRIBL HDR, but the RT's are specified to different objects thus giving more control on which objects use HDR, but the draw back to HL2 HDR object that work well with it are translucent objects

Also, this is why in large out doors scenes, Half life 2 won't have HDR on everything.

If you take a alook at the HL2 HDR demo movies, they specifically choose a scene where polycounts were low, very low.
 
Thanks for the info Merlin :D

I'd say we are still a little while away before hardware can go nuts with HDR.

We'll have to stick with the comprimises for now. Which are still looking very nice mind you. :D
 
openexr and fp blending and framebuffer are not part of SM3.0 spec, it is simply a coincidence that they both happen to be on the same chip. ATI is not obligated to put them on a SM 3.0 chip, it just would be stupid of them not to.
 
just think in the future, there will be no compromises with HDR, and we'll have games that can look as beautiful as this!

HQ-hdr.jpg


:eek: ;)
 
Merlin45 said:
openexr and fp blending and framebuffer are not part of SM3.0 spec, it is simply a coincidence that they both happen to be on the same chip. ATI is not obligated to put them on a SM 3.0 chip, it just would be stupid of them not to.
Click to expand...


Very true, hopefully they do incorportate both. Sm 3.0 really only cuts down number of passes, which makes it possible to do HDR on current level's of graphics performance aslong as geometry level's don't change.
 
rancor said:
Very true, hopefully they do incorportate both. Sm 3.0 really only cuts down number of passes, which makes it possible to do HDR on current level's of graphics performance aslong as geometry level's don't change.
Click to expand...

Who cares how many passes as long as it is fast.
 
R1ckCa1n said:
Who cares how many passes as long as it is fast.
Click to expand...


LOL cutting down passes is what makes it go fast. True HDR with SM 3.0 cuts it down to 2 passes that means the scene has to be rendered twice. So without ture HDR its going at 80 with true HDR will go at 40. Thats why the x800's can't do it. Cuase they will take 5 passes maybe more. So if your getting 80 fps without true HDR with true HDR it will be 16 fps.
 
rancor said:
LOL cutting down passes is what makes it go fast. True HDR with SM 3.0 cuts it down to 2 passes that means the scene has to be rendered twice. So without ture HDR its going at 80 with true HDR will go at 40. Thats why the x800's can't do it. Cuase they will take 5 passes maybe more. So if your getting 80 fps without true HDR with true HDR it will be 16 fps.
Click to expand...

Is that why HDR is in HL2 and ATI will do it? Please don't blanket your "SM3.0 ONLY FEATURES" since it really makes you look bad. Sad everything you sqew all day can be done with SM2.0 and just as fast as the NV40 does it in SM3.0.

It will be real fun to see the NV40 do "true HDR" in a real game instead of a demo created to show off their hardware.

Sooner or later everyone will see the light, ATI didn't include SM3.0 in this release because it didn't make business sense nor is current generation hardware ready for the real deal. Sorta like the 9700 pro and SM2.0. Look what happens to those cards in Far Cry, not to mention what the FX line does in DX9....... Hats off to Nvidia to make the jump first!
 
R1ckCa1n said:
Is that why HDR is in HL2 and ATI will do it? Please don't blanket your "SM3.0 ONLY FEATURES" since it really makes you look bad. Sad everything you sqew all day can be done with SM2.0 and just as fast as the NV40 does it in SM3.0.

It will be real fun to see the NV40 do "true HDR" in a real game instead of a demo created to show off their hardware.

Sooner or later everyone will see the light, ATI didn't include SM3.0 in this release because it didn't make business sense nor is current generation hardware ready for the real deal. Sorta like the 9700 pro and SM2.0. Look what happens to those cards in Far Cry, not to mention what the FX line does in DX9....... Hats off to Nvidia to make the jump first!
Click to expand...


Dude if you don't have the basic knowledge to determine fake and true HDR, just read the posts, Merlin and I already went through. There is a big IQ difference between HDR that runs reasonable well on dx 8.1 and dx9.0 and what can be done with dx9.0c. Its purelly a speed thing. ATi's cards if they try to do true HDR, can't cut it because of the lack of dynamic branching and looping. Its that simple.

Yes and you will be seeing them soon. Too bad you will be still huging on to your x800 pro, and thinking its god send, while everyone else can actaully sees the tip of the iceburg of what SM 3.0 has to offer......

You called me a mule before, guess what your brain is fixated on ATi's and its blocking your higher pathways, where you will see that ATi's features or the lack there of.

The difference between the 9700 pro and now is games arn't going to be increasing in polygon counts as they once were, not for another generation of graphics cards. Right now the focus is shaders. This is why the new engines are built around materials. This generation of games are going to utilize lights and materials to thier fullest potential.

As I stated along time back as a scene with HDR takes 2 passes with the nV40 class, yes it will slow them down. But now any shader that requires 2 passes won't slow it down anymore because the geometry in that scene is already being calculated a second time, there will be no wastage.

The Timbury demo uses high polygon characters, much higher then what you will see in a game. That alone with skeletal animation (since all the polys are pretty much on one character will be more intensive on the graphics cards then 10 characters with the same amount of polygon count, due to bandwidth) Now the down side is it doesn't show cpu using, but 10 characters with skeletal animations is nothing for today's cpu. What that demo demonstates is HDR is perfectly usable on todays hardware. Just like Ruby's demo that is doable. There are tricks game developers have to do that because of vram shortage. So you can't have it all in Ruby's but damn close to it.
 
There is a big IQ difference between HDR that runs reasonable well on dx 8.1 and dx9.0 and what can be done with dx9.0c
Click to expand...

Are you ever going to wait until actual comparisons in actual games before you stop repeating this comment ad nauseum?
 
SnakEyez187 said:
Are you ever going to wait until actual comparisons in actual games before you stop repeating this comment ad nauseum?
Click to expand...

Snake keep reading....... . At least you don't sound as dumb as Rick, but if you want to pick on someone, try to pick on the guy that doesn't know what he is talking about. If you don't see the difference between Timbury and Half life 2's HDR, get some glasses, make em out of focus too :D
 
SnakEyez187 said:
Are you ever going to wait until actual comparisons in actual games before you stop repeating this comment ad nauseum?
Click to expand...

rancor is stuck on demoitis....... Since it ran on a demo, it will run great in a game. ;)

rancor said:
The Timbury demo uses high polygon characters
Click to expand...

Need I say more? :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top