• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

HDR or AA?

A

ArchAngel777

Diamond Member
I have not read much in regards to this new HDR technology... However, I have been reading that with HDR enabled, AA will not work. If that is the case, then this technology has a major achiles heal, in my opion.

I have gotten so adjusted to 4XAA that I am not sure I would be able to enjoy HDR without any AA.

What is everyone's take on this? I am not too excited over this ability, from what I know about it. But, my knowledge is limited in regards to this technology.

Thoughts?
 
They are just bad implementations of HDR. The Source Engine allows both HDR and AA simultaneously.
 
Originally posted by: VIAN
They are just bad implementations of HDR. The Source Engine allows both HDR and AA simultaneously.
Click to expand...

So, it is up to the game designers for it to work with AA? Or more specifically, game engine developers?

Does anyone know if the CryEngine supports HDR with AA?
 
Originally posted by: compgeek89
CryEngine does not

HDR > AA
Click to expand...
Watch the jaggies in bright light, where do I sign up. 😛

Valve did a good job with their HDR implementation, lets see how many developers can achieve that.
 
Originally posted by: crazydingo
Originally posted by: compgeek89
CryEngine does not

HDR > AA
Click to expand...
Watch the jaggies in bright light, where do I sign up. 😛

Valve did a good job with their HDR implementation, lets see how many developers can achieve that.
Click to expand...

I am sure others will, with time. But regardless, if the Source Engine does it, then all games based on that Engine will as well. I am sure we will be seeing quite a few games in the future powered by Source.
 
Originally posted by: compgeek89
CryEngine's HDR was just a small patch, Valve's is a reprogramming of the engine.
Click to expand...

how come any half-life 2 map that has HDR needs to be made from the ground up or totally revamped? HDR works any any level in Farcry.
 
I'd rather not have to choose; HL2 (DOD:S) has got the ideal solution - HDR and AA both work at the same time, look great, and performance isn't (too) bad. When I DO have to choose (FarCry), I choose AA over HDR, especially since FarCry's HDR isn't that great and hits your framerates even harder, it seems.
 
My vote: No AA, Real HDR+High enough res (=few jaggies). Plus $49,000 HDR LCD.

There are two types of HDR used in games today:

HDR emulated through pixel shaders(?) which allows HDR+AA simultaneously. Works on most video cards. It's also faster.
"Real" HDR (conforming to the OpenEXR spec) does not allow AA at the same time, but has a higher dynamic range using FP16. Works only on GeForce 6/7.

Originally posted by: SonicIce
how come any half-life 2 map that has HDR needs to be made from the ground up or totally revamped? HDR works any any level in Farcry.
Click to expand...

Engines like Source have their lighting precompiled in to the map file AFAIK. Whereas Doom 3 calculates light on-the-fly, so the lighting isn't compiled in to the map and it can be scaled according to their HDR implementation. It could be that Source calculates it on-the-fly but the results were more desirable recompiling the radiance map completely.

Originally posted by: crazydingo
Valve did a good job with their HDR implementation, lets see how many developers can achieve that.
Click to expand...

Every developer can but they choose to have the higher range of real HDR.

However since most monitors don't support that high of a contrast ratio nowadays (including high-end AG CRTs), I think right NOW it's better to use the LDR (as Valve calls it) and allow AA and vast support for video cards.

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777
Then my opinion of the Source Engine goes up, while CryEngine drops a few points...
Click to expand...

It's more a problem with current video cards than anything with CryTek's engine. I really hope R520 can do Real HDR+AA.
 
Originally posted by: xtknight
My vote: No AA, Real HDR+High enough res (=few jaggies). Plus $49,000 HDR LCD.

There are two types of HDR used in games today:

HDR emulated through pixel shaders(?) which allows HDR+AA simultaneously. Works on most video cards. It's also faster.
"Real" HDR (conforming to the OpenEXR spec) does not allow AA at the same time, but has a higher dynamic range using FP16. Works only on GeForce 6/7.
Click to expand...

Exactly - that's what I heard as well. It's not Crytek's implementation of HDR that doesn't support AA, it's the OpenEXR HDR (currently only on Nvidia GF 6/7 cards) that can only operate with AA disabled.


Originally posted by: crazydingo
Valve did a good job with their HDR implementation, lets see how many developers can achieve that.
Click to expand...

Every developer can but they choose to have the higher range of real HDR.

However since most monitors don't support that high of a contrast ratio nowadays (including high-end AG CRTs), I think right NOW it's better to use the LDR (as Valve calls it) and allow AA and vast support for video cards. [/quote]

I still think HDR (for example, that in Far Cry) looks excellent. And we will soon see it in Half Life 2 as well.

That monitors don't have support for that high of a contrast ratio is irrelevant; HDR renders everything internally at a much higher precision, and yields output that has more contrast in it. Sure better, more expensive screens will display the difference better, but HDR (and not just the bloom effect) does make a difference. Have you tried Far Cry with HDR? There's more to it than just bloom - it really is stunning looking!
 
Originally posted by: jiffylube1024
That monitors don't have support for that high of a contrast ratio is irrelevant; HDR renders everything internally at a much higher precision, and yields output that has more contrast in it. Sure better, more expensive screens will display the difference better, but HDR (and not just the bloom effect) does make a difference. Have you tried Far Cry with HDR? There's more to it than just bloom - it really is stunning looking!
Click to expand...

But it does no good to store such high radiance levels if the bottleneck is our display. Thus we should use the LDR which is still above the range of current monitors AFAIK. The values must be scaled.

If the highest value is (60000,60000,60000) it must go to (255,255,255). There is no more contrast until our monitors improve. Hence at the moment it looks bright and overdone (especially bloom). Disable HDR scaling in Photoshop when opening an EXR image, and the majority of it will be white due to such high values. It must be scaled to retain the image.

The bloom isn't what I love about it. The tone mapping looks stunning.
 
The Source engine is the best-looking and most efficient graphics engine to date IMO. I'm still amazed at how fast Counter Strike Source runs, even on a 9700Pro. :thumbsup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top