Motion blur

[Tank Program]

Works on my AMD64 with a nVidia, that screenshot there is my desktop with an ATI. Reporting like 50 FPS @ 1024x768 max settings, 20 frames layered (if I understand this code right). Had to take a screenshot with printscreen as the screenshot key returned without blurs. Seems to be related to CPU power available, cause when I tried again while gimp was compiling performance was much worse...

Edt: it's a GeForceFX 5200 PCI 128MB

[Z-Man]

Here on the crappy NVida FX 5200, I get pretty much the performance you would expect from its lousy fillrate; I get 800x600x1 or 512x384x2 or 400x300x3 (the third number being the number of frames blurred together). I'll try how far I get at 1280x1024 with my 6800 later
The result surely looks smoother and is a better way to burn your GPU capacity than just disabling VSYNC. I personally don't like the blurryness, but that may just be me not being happy with running AA at such low resolutions.

[hang3r]

ok, err my video card out performs a FX 5200 what is going on???? is it falling back to software rendering or something????

EDIT: nvm, my video card doesn’t have hardware accelerated accumulation buffer...

[Z-Man]

Most probably, yes. And mind you the FPS display in tank's screenshot is the FPS of the sub-frames, so he really got 2 fps in total.
I forgot to say: I got 60 fps in total in all settings.

[Jonathan]

I personally don't like the blurryness, but that may just be me not being happy with running AA at such low resolutions.

I'm sure it's better when superframe rate == refresh rate.

[Tank Program]

I find maxcount 8 gives the best effect here . I'm trying to figure out a way to tweak the GL_ACCUM : GL_LOAD line so that it looks better... Basically just messing around for the fun of it .

[Z-Man]

I'm sure it's better when superframe rate == refresh rate.

It was for me. All I know right now is that given the choice between 800x600 at 60 fps and no motion blur and 512x384 at 60 real fps with motion blur, I take 800x600.

[Jonathan]

It was for me. All I know right now is that given the choice between 800x600 at 60 fps and no motion blur and 512x384 at 60 real fps with motion blur, I take 800x600.

Ah, OK. Maybe more than 2 subframes would help a bit.

/me wishes he could maintain his refresh rate.

[Tank Program]

Maybe if we could get it to run fast and just barely be noticeable it'd be really cool, aside that, probably not worth it yet.

[Jonathan]

I can try rendering into a pbuffer and compositing into the framebuffer (using CGL on OS X). At least that's hardware accelerated.

[Lucifer]

Google told me some stuff.

Render to a texture, then render your scene, then put the texture in the front with an alpha effect. So grab the last rendered scene, I guess, and use it for the next. This is the method they say GTA uses.

I found a reference on a forum (for something called Oni) where they just render the object multiple times with an alpha, apparently like I was talking higher up.

Edit: Here's one for you, Jonathan, where he uses the pbuffer:
http://www.zanir.szm.sk/30-39.html

[hang3r]

Google told me some stuff.
Render to a texture, then render your scene, then put the texture in the front with an alpha effect. So grab the last rendered scene, I guess, and use it for the next. This is the method they say GTA uses.

Hang3r also told you some stuff, but you didnt follow that link

[Lucifer]

Sorry, I was sleepy when you posted that. I'll go back and read it, but it'll have to be after class. (I was also sleepy when Google was talking to me, but that was because I had just woken up)

[hang3r]

There’s no need to be sorry about it, tiredness plays tricks

[Jonathan]

Here's one for you, Jonathan, where he uses the pbuffer:
http://www.zanir.szm.sk/30-39.html

That's trails.