Hey Tristam,

Thanks very much for the feedback. I just ten minutes ago subscribed
to your blog, upon discovering your pyglet experimental shader
module! :-) *That's* certainly going to save me some (not
inconsiderable, for me) effort.

I've currently planned the game design around the couple of hundred
meshes I seem to be able to get using the traditional API on
relatively modest hardware. I was thinking that any extra meshes I
could get on top of that would be handy for adding relatively
superfluous (but cool!) special effects (fancier explosions, blowing
smoke, rendered in a retro-styled vector manner.)

On Apr 19, 6:30 pm, Tristam MacDonald <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Jonathan Hartley <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>
>
> > It seems that the traditional OpenGL API I've been using is a bit of
> > an anti-pattern these days - especially calling it from Python. If you
> > have many independently positioned and oriented meshes, then you have
> > to render each one with a separate glDrawArrays (or whatever) call,
> > and change the model-view matrix between each call. Making these
> > multiple function calls, passing through ctypes parameter wrangling
> > each time, then changing opengl state, seem to form a significant
> > performance overhead.
>
> > As I understand it, using pyglet batches takes a *lot* of the headache
> > out of this, but it still requires me to make these modelview changes
> > between each batch - under the scenes is it doing the same thing as
> > above? I think so but obviously would love to hear if I'm wrong.
>
> > Plus, it seems, support for the traditional API is often implemented
> > as a shader on modern graphics hardware, and these shaders have to
> > handle *all* the byzantine features of OpenGL, regardless of whether
> > you're actually using those features, so these shaders used for the
> > traditional API are quite large and inefficient.
>
> Your understanding is correct on all these points.
>
> > My use case is this: I have a bunch of simple 2D geometries (~20 to
> > 100 verts each) and I want to render a lot of them all over the place
> > at various positions, sizes, orientations. I'm not using textures, and
> > I'm not using lighting. It's all very simple.
>
> How many of these objects do you expect to draw in a single frame? Less than
> 75-100 should be perfectly fine, using a draw call each.
>
> Upon reading about shaders, it seems a good idea to me to create a
>
>
>
> > single large vertex array containing modelspace co-ords for every
> > entity that I want to render, and add a custom vertex attribute which
> > is an index into a second array of model transformations. My vertex
> > shader would retrieve the desired model transformation by indexing
> > into this second array (maybe as a matrix, maybe simply as a 2D offset
> > and rotation) apply the transform to generate the gl_Position output.
> > It could do this on every vertex in my scene in a single call to
> > glDrawArrays(), thus circumventing the function-call overhead I incur
> > using the traditional API.
>
> > I still have to update the values in the second 'transforms' array. If
> > every mesh in my scene was moving all the time, and I had to update
> > each transform individually, going through ctypes every time, then I
> > might just be right back where I started. But if only a few of my
> > meshes are moving around at once (many in-game objects were just
> > resting on the ground where they lay), or if I can update the whole
> > transform matrix as a single update (maybe as the output from some
> > numpy wrangling) then this might not be so bad.
>
> > Do people think this is a useful idea, or am I misunderstanding how
> > things work?
>
> The technique you are describing sounds like a logical extension of NVidia's
> technique to fake instanced geometry, on cards without instancing. As such,
> it should work, although I am not sure how much of a performance benefit you
> will see.
>
> --
> Tristam MacDonaldhttp://swiftcoder.wordpress.com/
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"pyglet-users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/pyglet-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to