Show me the 2D!

category: general [glöplog]
trace: never got that working before, but now I have. Very nicely done :D

I never got mine working realtime, but I was going for higher quality and vertical slices (640 slices total.. = slow and memory hungry).
added on the 2009-02-22 03:00:06 by psonice psonice
BB Image
added on the 2009-02-22 04:10:03 by xernobyl xernobyl
added on the 2009-02-22 11:05:18 by Optimus Optimus
Well, today you don't use to see very often stand-alone 2d effect but maybe used as postprocessing filters on 3D scenes. It's not very easy to spot them or enjoy them. It feels like you don't see spectacularly new effects at all (exception is for me stargazer or some equinoxe invitations). Maybe I am mistaken because they are not easy to spot. In the past there was a standalone 2d effect in the background and maybe a 3d object in the foreground or not. But to have a standalone 2d effect today, maybe the demo part would look like too empty, so they prefer to have 2d effects as postprocessing upon 3d scenes or something. For example, before trying to code anything on shaders, I assumed that old 2d effects like plasma, distortion or fractals or anything, were not easy to code because you never happen to see them clearly on shader demos (I think). But they were the easiest shit. Most people do reflections, bump mapping, post processing filters, etc in shaders on 3d scenes. Maybe because simple 2d effects would look lame or too empty in modern hardware especially if not done properly or in a different way. But for some reasons, I think, you don't usually see something cool like the old 2d effects in shaders but something you have to be a shader coder to understand that there is something here. I think..
added on the 2009-02-22 11:40:32 by Optimus Optimus
added on the 2009-02-22 12:04:59 by havoc havoc
...too much text without carriage return
added on the 2009-02-22 13:55:19 by Tigrou Tigrou