Robert,
All right, thanks a lot for your input! -- Alexandre Vaillancourt 2015-02-05 4:20 GMT-05:00 Robert Osfield <[email protected]>: > HI Alexandre, > > It's a while since I touched the code, but I think with the > ViewDependentShadowMap the casters also normally need to be a receiver as > it'll self shadow, but there may also be the constraint that the actual > rendering of objects is done via the shadow receivers pass. I vagually > recall that there might have to been a lot of code and CPU cost associated > with binning casters but not receivers. > > The bit you'd normally want to toggle off is the terrain being a shadow > caster. > > Robert. > > On 4 February 2015 at 23:34, Alexandre Vaillancourt < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Thanks Robert, >> >> The shadow technique being used is ViewDependentShadowMap. >> >> I understand that trying to find where the issue comes from is like >> searching for a needle in a stack of hay. I'm trying to figure out myself >> how the system is being programmed as I'm not at all familiar with that >> aspect of OSG and the way we're using it regarding shaders/shadow, as I'm >> not the one who programmed it, so, don't worry, I'm not expecting exact >> reasons why stuff don't work. >> >> Checking the diff between 3.1.1 and 3.2.0 regarding shadows does not >> reveal anything that I would think of being a game changer, so this is why >> I'm confused. >> >> >> I'm under windows 8.1, visual studio 2013, GeForce GTX 780 Ti, driver >> version 347.09. >> >> In the mean time, I've been able to find a way to have the objects >> visible again by changing the node mask of the main node shadowed and the >> node mask of the nodes that were hidden. >> >> >> >> If anyone cares (that's not much of importance :P), here are the rough >> changes I did : >> with: >> unsigned int CAST_SHADOW_TRAVERSAL_MASK = 0x00000002; >> unsigned int RECEIVE_SHADOW_TRAVERSAL_MASK = 0x00000001; >> shadowSetting->setCastsShadowTraversalMask( CAST_SHADOW_TRAVERSAL_MASK ); >> shadowSetting->setReceivesShadowTraversalMask( >> RECEIVE_SHADOW_TRAVERSAL_MASK ); >> >> the ShadowedNode was set like this >> mEnvShadowedNode->setNodeMask( mEnvShadowedNode->getNodeMask() & >> CAST_SHADOW_TRAVERSAL_MASK ); // Now set to 2... maybe nodes below were >> culled because of that, I could not figure it out. >> >> and the nodes in the ShadowedNode >> mobileObject->setNodeMask( CAST_SHADOW_TRAVERSAL_MASK ); // assume cast >> AND receive >> staticObject->setNodeMask( RECEIVE_SHADOW_TRAVERSAL_MASK ); // assume >> receive only >> >> So assuming that the CAST mask is no longer sufficient to have it receive >> as well, I removed the nodemask setting from the mEnvShadowedNode and the >> mobileObject (now using the default values of all 1) and I set the nodemask >> to the static object to something like: >> staticObject->setShadowMask( staticObject->getShadowMask() & ! >> CAST_SHADOW_TRAVERSAL_MASK ); // This way we disable the shadow casting, >> while keeping the receiving and keeping the other parts of the mask. >> >> Now it displays as expected, but I'm not sure yet if there are other >> parts of the code that no longer behave appropriately. >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Alexandre Vaillancourt >> >> 2015-02-04 9:31 GMT-05:00 Robert Osfield <[email protected]>: >> >>> HI Alexandre, >>> >>> On 4 February 2015 at 13:23, Alexandre Vaillancourt < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> I've been told that objects that were casting shadow were automatically >>>> set to receive shadows as well, and that it was an implementation >>>> constraint that was not avoidable. >>>> >>>> Has this constraint been resolved, making it so that if we want an >>>> object to cast and receive shadows we have to set both mask explicitly (not >>>> only "cast")? >>>> >>> >>> This will depend upon the ShadowTechnique being used. I don't recall >>> the which ones have what constraints though, been a couple of years since >>> I've worked on osgShadow. >>> >>> I'm trying to figure out issues that seemed to have appeared after from >>>> upgrading from 3.1.1 to 3.2.0 but I can't figure out what went wrong. (Some >>>> objects went missing from sight.) >>>> >>> >>> There are too few details for us to be able to guess what might be >>> wrong. We don't know what shadow technique you are using, the data you are >>> working with, what types of objects are going missing, what >>> platform/hardware you are working on. >>> >>> Robert. >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> osg-users mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> osg-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > osg-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org > >
_______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
