Hi Josh, You're probably right. I've only been testing with colored primitives and pixel-art style textures. When I say "solid", I mean textures that are opaque and might have pure transparency (basically 1 or 0 alpha only, like the "examples/pyglet.png" file). When I say translucency, I mean something like a glass window that has variable levels of opacity (like you get with the .opacity attribute on pyglet.Sprites).
I'll have to make up some more varied test textures to really see how things look. My hope was that there is a way to make the current unordered batches work acceptably, even if it requires a few set/unset_state calls per draw. Something like depth peeling is probably overkill, and we'd be better off going with ordered batches similar to what you're working on. -Ben On Wednesday, November 2, 2016 at 1:48:04 AM UTC+9, Josh wrote: > > Hi Benjamin, > > When you say solid and translucent textures, are you assuming that the > entire texture is one or the other? The problem I had that I couldn't solve > with depth-invariant rendering order was with sprites that mix the two. > This is actually a much more common use case than it sounds: any > antialiased sprite that isn't a perfect rectangle will have translucent > boundaries. When I try to render these using depth testing and alpha > threshholding with these sprites, I wind up with really hideous artifacts > at the outlines. Did you find a solution to this? I would love to learn > more. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pyglet-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/pyglet-users. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
