How closely can something like this be replicated in real time/ingame graphics? What techniques are involved in good looking realtime fur and eyes?
chicken cordon bleu
>>563713Lots and lots of polygons.Shaders, "fur effects" and whatever else look like absolute crap. Compared to just building it manually with polys, something like Neofur or Hairworks produces a similar result while destroying the performance just to add simple physics to it. Not especially good for anything besides plain hair because of the performance hit, and then also not great at that either.
>>563713Vulkan api is the only remotely way possible. Open gl or dx ain't handling that
>>564400> DURR VULKAN VULKAN DRRRRR OMG VULKAN DURRRRRRRRYou do not have even the slightest idea what you are talking about.
>>564437holy shit whats your problem>>564328you can do it through a shader. you can also do it via displacement or through hair boxes. whatever fancy name you wanna call it, its always the same.the reason to why its not being used is because it takes alot of extra work and time
>>564438Holy shit what's your problem? If you answer these questions correctly I will continue posting in this thread. However if you know the answer to these questions you should realize how autistic you sound bringing up Vulkan here.1) Explain the main situations that Vulkan/DirectX12 gives an advantage over OpenGL/DX11.2) Explain the challenges that make realtime hair difficult.3) Explain the relationship between nVidia HairWorks and Vulkan.
>>564438Other way around, manually building the hair out of polygons and textures takes a longer time than shaders or hairworks-like solutions. It's also used more, despite being the more work-intensive solution, because it doesn't look like absolute garbage. Whod've thought???
>>563713Realtime fur is nowhere close to that quality. It's just to computationally expensive to draw lit filaments by any known method to get it looking like that. Type in a search string like 'real time fur research' into google and you'll find out where we are today.'Geometry shaders' is probably your best candidate for getting an effect like that going. Most of the ones you see will be 'programmer art' so a clever tech-artist can prob push them to look a lot better than the examples we have.Reason you don't really see any of those is that they're still too costly to make them worthwhile to attempt to implement in AAA games and such.
I dunno what they used in Witcher 3, but that shit was great.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMGPKlpaIxI
>>565097It's hairworks>cut the framerate in half>made a bear look like it was covered in short, thick pubes that culled from the render at the edges of the model before they were even offscreenYeah, really good.
>>564462Yeah anon, he's the one that sounds autistic alright.
>>563713Not got anything to add besides the fact that I went to college with the dude who did Rocket. He did Harvey Dent's melted head in 'Dark Knight' too. Adam Dewhurst. Nice guy.
>>565257literally anyone could have done that. Those two examples are generic and forgettable as all hell
>>565113is there an open source alternative to this?
>>565231Did you just call that guy autistic for seemingly knowing things related to the original post? wtf man
>>565407TressFX (possibly "Purehair" now?), developed by AMD, MIT license. Dunno how well it does fur, only know of 3 games to have used it.
>>563713They are probably rendering every strand of fur and with full shading on it. Not gonna happen in real-time for a long ass time really. If ever. A lot of people on this board don't seem to understand just how massively overpowered big budget render farms are. I really wonder just how much ram it would take just to render that model.
>>565672Im rendering on a GTX980 and it's a fukkin nightmare
>>565672you could probably render it on any computer really. Would take fucking centuries though.