-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
What do gamers actually think about Ray-Tracing?
- Thread starter Purgatory
- Start date
Caporegime
Associate
i like it on, it obviously usually makes games look better, but boy does it kill fps even on high spec machines.
Man of Honour
Caporegime
The fact that it's not obvious which one I would pick should be a crime and you should go to jail
I already said you would pick left though!
Now stop ducking the question!
Caporegime
Man of Honour
Why do you think I'd prefer the left one? The right one has the more natural illumination without the awkward blue tint on surfaces that should not have it - IN this example the more accurate image is number 2 so I'd say that was the RT/PT one and left is raster because raster doesn't factor in dynamic emissive light sources to then build bounced lighting on surfaces (and shadows).
Caporegime
I am saying that based on images you posted before. PT ones looked more like the image on the left 
@Calin Banc time to reveal what's what
@Calin Banc time to reveal what's what
Man of Honour
I think you need your eyes examined man! There are no blue tinged images in any of my PT screenshots
Last edited:
Caporegime
I think you need your eyes examined man! There are no blue tinged images in any of my PT screenshots
Ignore that though. What about the rest of the image. What makes it Raster and what makes the one on the right PT?
Man of Honour
Shall we do a deep dive? I think a deep dive is in order.....Ignore that though. What about the rest of the image. What makes it Raster and what makes the one on the right PT?
Litter on 1 has unusual illumination in areas of the box that should be in dark shadow because no light source is casting light on those sides:
The emissive ceiling light is amber toned, on 1 the light source is not casting GI on the surrounding concrete structure of the ceiling, it is on 2:
The underside of this ceiling is in an area that has no bounced surface lighting cast off the ground or anywhere else so should be fully shadowed, it is not in 1, so 1 would be the raster as raster isn't clever enough to account for this:
Scaffolding reflections are missing on 1 vs 2:
The edging of the concrete structure is missing a shadow run where less light hits that face of the beam on 1:
Pavement ledge, the 90 degree facing part of the pavement faces light sources and should be illuminated this time round, but the raster in 1 is painting this surface with shadow when there should not be a shadow. 2 is correctly lit in this instance:
The concrete wall has angled sections facing the sky so the flatter 90 degree bits of the upper wall should have a different shade vs the lower angled part that faces the sky. On 1 the entire wall is the same shade, 1 is the raster:
Once you've played enough games with ray tracing all of the above are immediately obvious and noticed even in motion. I guess we've become trained subconsciously to notice them too as something doesn't feel "right" with raster in every game now that has environments like this.
Last edited:
Caporegime
How would this look with RT? considering it is getting it, its actively being worked on right now. What difference would GI light bounce make to this scene? @mrk
Its wrong to say i'm not interested in RT, i am....
Its wrong to say i'm not interested in RT, i am....
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Probably not much, that screenshot is of a scene that isn't that complex. It's in space for starters with only one single light source, there are no props around the camera for bounce GI to take effect on anything and everything that isn't star facing will be cast in shadow. This scene is extremely easy to render convincingly with just raster if we only look at the scene as presented in the image!
If anything, the little lights on the ship would cast more accurate bounce illumination on the ship's hull, but they would be minor details given the grand scale of the scene's viewport there.
If anything, the little lights on the ship would cast more accurate bounce illumination on the ship's hull, but they would be minor details given the grand scale of the scene's viewport there.
Last edited:
Caporegime
Ok, makes sense, you would think the the bottom of the ship would catch some light from the planet below tho?
Man of Honour
I don't know what the overall colour of the ship is since it's so much in shadow on the non sun facing side, if it's a grey then maybe yeah but the screenshot doesn't show the underside of the ship so we don't know if the raster has painted some form of light under the ship as means of reflection from the planet being lit by the sun there.
Caporegime
Its a gloss white.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Ah then yes, some RTGI would allow for some illumination/reflections of the planet's surface!
Last edited:
Take a look at this vidHow would this look with RT? considering it is getting it, its actively being worked on right now. What difference would GI light bounce make to this scene? @mrk
Its wrong to say i'm not interested in RT, i am....
The ISS found itself in an orbit where the Sun does not set at all
Italian astronaut Samantha Cristoforetti from the European Space Agency shared footage of an exciting astronomical phenomenon
universemagazine.com
Caporegime
Take a look at this vid
The ISS found itself in an orbit where the Sun does not set at all
Italian astronaut Samantha Cristoforetti from the European Space Agency shared footage of an exciting astronomical phenomenon
Interesting, i'll read that later, thank you
