Originally Posted by Stromberg90
I only know about shadow maps from lights and I think that is where the shadows are saved to a image, than it's then projected from the light onto the scene like a decal.
(You might be talking about something else)
Lambert can be useful I think, but say I was doing a realistic rendering I would never use it(Long since I did that though)
The two things above I don't really know enough about to answer correctly, but the capital of Norway is Oslo ;)
Interesting, so in theory, Lambert is helping you cover the 'buffer' issues on curved models so that the shadows look smooth, hence why in theory, Lambert is the simplest hack?
At least, that's what I hope I understood.
Originally Posted by ahtiandr
If you want to get real realism by that I mean real light calculations in 3d then you should use special shaders like mia material in maya.
"The mia_material primarily attempts to be physically accurate"...
you can read more here about mia material and what it does :
Max arch viz materials should be the equivalent
PEEP! It seems like Oren Nayar is what most consider also to be 'physically' correct, but since Oren is based upon the Lambert math, this bring back Lambert into the play vs. the shadows by themselves.
Originally Posted by gray
what are shadow maps you say?
you dare speak such blaspheme!
well i'm not sure how technical you want to get. and i'm not sure how accurate i can get depending on how technical you want to get... but shadow maps form what i understand are basically a depth buffer image taken from the point of view of a non-physical light source into the 3d scene. like a spot light which is just a point in space that shades each object individually without ray casting. what ever is occluded from the point of view of the light does not receive a light contribution in the final rendered image. so if there is one light in a scene the occluded areas would be black.
shadow maps were a technique used before raytracing was fast enough to light scenes for films. and i suppose it is blazing fast to use in real time rendering, alto i have no experience with implementing something like that. its a map that can be saved to disk just like you can save a z-buffer image to disk.
AO and Light maps are definitely different from shadow maps. i'm not sure what graphics papers your reading but i assume that perhaps they mean that if you had lights with shadow maps in a scene then the diffuse shading would look more realistic then if you had the same lights without shadow maps. ie, the occluded areas would be darker and look more natural. that's just a guess tho.
also congratulations on reading graphics research papers
regardless of what they are about. keeping up with research gives you a giant imaginary hammer to clobber your foes with...
and to answer your second question the capital of norway is is a very small half man half fish creature that lives in a slightly oblong magnetic sphere on the tip of the eiffel tower.
Ah, that explains some hefty stuff, and from what I gathered at this point, they can be real-time, but this confuses me even more, why refer to them as 'maps'? Is there a reason, especially for RT stuff?
Originally Posted by Adam L. Gray
I know this, Africa! Yurrs, winrar to me!
On a more serious though still low on competence note, as I don't know that much about tech stuff and shaders in general:
All I know, is that there are multiple ways to render AO, but that it's basically shadows rendered based on angles and whatnot, lol. Light-tracer in max seems to cast rays and act more like normal ray-traced shadows though, bombarding with light from all directions. It can also include bounces and bounce-colour. With the addition of course that it creates shadows where surfaces meet and bend at an angle.
Lightmaps, like the ones in UDK however seems not to only store shadows, but also light direction from what I managed to figure out myself so far.
As for the term shadow-map in general, I always thought of that as a collection of different shadow-maps (AO and Lightmaps for example). But as you mention, there might be more to it. That being said, it wouldn't be very surprising if it has different meanings to different people.
Yep, I guess you can say we both have the same issue, certain terms don't make sense anymore in this day and age, especially with RT stuff when you think about it, so I guess reading Shadowmaps for me is like calling Ketchup Catchup, pending on your background, one of them won't make sense.
Originally Posted by gray
@Adam L. Gray
unfortunately no. shadow maps are a distinct well defined entity. they are not open to your interpretation. they are distinct from other lighting and shadowing models. a lack of information will not change that. there are many sources where you can find explanations of what shadow maps are and how to use them.
Well, as I said to Gray, it's a problem of 'background' more then anything, unless you plan on spending time on looking up the how and where the terms comes from, you can very easily fall into a pit that will make you waste months of your life.
I'm not saying Shadowmaps don't have the proper meaning defined over the years, I just wish people in their papers would define it more properly on both variables of it being process-bakes, RT OR Screen-Buffered.
I can vouch that several 'big' name companies in their white papers called AO, Lightmaps, and even SSAO as 'Shadowmaps', under the same header, which is what confused me in the first place about all of this.
I did, but alot of the stuff in there is lacking information about RT stuff with examples for noobs like, the 'temple' example serves it purpose, but after reading the rest of the article after a while, I come back to the images, and say 'Wait, this doesn't make sense...'
If you guys have much easier 'noob' reading stuff for people like, please by all means keep posting!