Grand Theft Auto V Becomes Gaming Evolved Game Title with Contact Hardening Shadows

[monstercameron]

Its great that they have 3 different modes for gamers to pick which they prefer, really show Rockstar cares about PC gamers.

well at that point why not enable a sliding option to control shadow sharpness and blur distance versus implementing 3 shadow subsystems.

 

[96Firebird]

well at that point why not enable a sliding option to control shadow sharpness and blur distance versus implementing 3 shadow subsystems.

As far as Rockstar's implementation goes, there is options for sharp, soft, softer, and softest. No option for distance, because I'm not sure if they take distance into account with their shadows. I think ComputerBase used the softest Rockstar setting for their image.

 

[loccothan]

I have Shadows on Very High + AMD CHS and it look OK to me
Game is Superb tho, 7h stright Smile on my face...


BTW i have run RadeonPRO + SweetFX and now game not crash on Start.
Updated screens with RP+SweetFX on my BLOG.

All you have to do is turn off in Radeon Settings / Compatibility List / Ignore DX9,10,10.1 And game run stable

 

[ThatBuzzkiller]

People need to realize that NEITHER soft shadow techniques are PHYSICALLY BASED, i.e. they do not take into account any well defined theories light transport ...

It all comes down to preference of the effect achieved by the technique so NO case can be made about their accuracy when they're all equally faulty ...

I much prefer the harder shadows given by CHS but that doesn't mean it's right for me to assert it's accuracy over PCSS, etc and vice versa ...

 

[3DVagabond]

It looks like AMD's CHS runs even better on NV GPUs than on AMD GPUs. AMD is in the business of enabling their competitors to stomp all over them.

The 980 is faster than the 290X. The only way to have it not "stomp all over them" is to artificially limit the 980's performance. We don't need even one company punishing gamers like that, never mind both of them. I have no idea when you decided that it was OK, but it's not.

 

[soccerballtux]

Easiest comparison

Go out and look at the real shadows cast by the leaves of a tree.

From that, I can see AMD CHS is a bit sharper and less blurred while Nvidia PCSS are kinda too blurred. Neither looked perfect.

Rockstar's looked the best for me

bro go outside and look at THOSE shadows. very sharp, not blurred, not graphics card needed

 

[96Firebird]

Here is a perfect example of how shadows change with respect to distance from the object.

Found this while looking for more info about AMD's CHS (very little info from AMD about it), looks like this person implemented the effect very nicely judging by their screenshots: http://www.ogre3d.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=74468

 

[Silverforce11]

The 980 is faster than the 290X. The only way to have it not "stomp all over them" is to artificially limit the 980's performance. We don't need even one company punishing gamers like that, never mind both of them. I have no idea when you decided that it was OK, but it's not.

Sure the 980 is 10% faster overall, but I've seen a few benchmarks for GTAV (most don't say which shadow they used) where the 980 is 25-30% faster. I'm assuming its PCSS, because in the benches that specifically mention shadow type or ones that use Rockstar's type, the gap is 10%.

 

[Silverforce11]

Here is a perfect example of how shadows change with respect to distance from the object.

Found this while looking for more info about AMD's CHS (very little info from AMD about it), looks like this person implemented the effect very nicely judging by their screenshots: http://www.ogre3d.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=74468

That's really nice, almost perfect.

Looks so real I was thinking it must be a rendered & not live scene.

 

[Gloomy]

From what I have seen CHS is bugged and isn't blurring as much as it should be. It shouldn't look too different from PCSS.

Here is a perfect example of how shadows change with respect to distance from the object.


Found this while looking for more info about AMD's CHS (very little info from AMD about it), looks like this person implemented the effect very nicely judging by their screenshots: http://www.ogre3d.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=74468

AMD has the samples including a pdf with an overview of their algorithm in their developer site.

It's different from what that guy's implementation. AMD's CHS estimates the size of the penumbra (the blurry part of a shadow) using the same penumbra estimation formula PCSS uses, then uses this number to fill a matrix with weights that are applied to the shadow map samples.

Nvidia's PCSS does the penumbra estimation, but then uses this number to increase the size of the PCF kernel along the length of the shadow. As you increase the size of the kernel, you increase the chance that the kernel will sample outside the shadow, softening the output from the kernel along the edges towards the tip of the shadow.

That guy is just blurring based on distance, it's not like (AMD's) CHS or (Nvidia's) PCSS.

Someone will come in and correct me if I got something horribly wrong, I'm sure. :awe:

 

[Whitestar127]

Not true. Look here:

http://www.computerbase.de/bildstrecke/64346/1/

Rockstar's shadow is slightly blurred.

CHS is very sharp.

PCSS is very blurred.

Which is better is subjective.

CHS is too hard and PCSS is too soft. I would prefer something smack in the middle. Just to be difficult!

 

[omeds]

Softer shadows look better imo. I suspect there is more shimmer in motion with hard shadows.

 

[loccothan]

And i see, is a nice Shadow Based discussion.
Great gentelman, always happy to learn ;-)
BTW i have nice looking Shadows in GTA5 with CHS

 

[thilanliyan]

That's really nice, almost perfect.

Looks so real I was thinking it must be a rendered & not live scene.

That particular screenshot IS a real scene. If you go to the linked thread, the guy did a decent job in his engine.

 

[therealnickdanger]

That particular screenshot IS a real scene. If you go to the linked thread, the guy did a decent job in his engine.

LOL

I wasn't sure if he was being sarcastic or not.

 

[Silverforce11]

LOL

I wasn't sure if he was being sarcastic or not.

Looks achievable with 4K textures and a good lighting system. I've seen some pretty damn realistic engines lately.

 

[96Firebird]

From what I have seen CHS is bugged and isn't blurring as much as it should be. It shouldn't look too different from PCSS.

I'm wondering if it is bugged as well, to me it just looks like hard shadows. I even started the game up and switched between the shadow types to see if ComputerBase mistook their CHS screen for the sharp setting, but that wasn't the case. I took screenshots, but Afterburner only saved 2 of the 4 that I took. I'll have to go back and do it again. I even went down to the beach area and used a tree like in the real-life example.

 

[monstercameron]

I'm wondering if it is bugged as well, to me it just looks like hard shadows. I even started the game up and switched between the shadow types to see if ComputerBase mistook their CHS screen for the sharp setting, but that wasn't the case. I took screenshots, but Afterburner only saved 2 of the 4 that I took. I'll have to go back and do it again. I even went down to the beach area and used a tree like in the real-life example.

can you try to get a scene with fine details and far/close shadows?

 

[railven]

Grand Theft Auto V Becomes Gaming Evolved Game Title with Contact Hardening Shadows

Read more at http://www.legitreviews.com/grand-t...-hardening-shadows_161626#YChV7UFfI4cMRLHM.99

And don't wage H/W vendor wars in my thread
THX

The only question that needs to be asked - will it now be bundled with Radeon cards?

Itching to play with a 290/X, and this might be enough to make me eat any resale losses haha.

 

[Pottuvoi]

CHS is too hard and PCSS is too soft. I would prefer something smack in the middle. Just to be difficult!

I wonder if PCSS is too soft..
The correct softness for sun and moon is ~0.5 degrees which is quite soft.

 

[BrentJ]

The only way to really find out which is more "accurate" is to go into the real-world and take pictures of shadows, using trees with leaves, and see how the shadows fall over distance.

If the goal of 3D graphics in gaming is to look as realistic to the real-world as possible, then whichever method looks like real-world shadows compared by photographs, is the more real to life one.

 

[Pottuvoi]

The only way to really find out which is more "accurate" is to go into the real-world and take pictures of shadows, using trees with leaves, and see how the shadows fall over distance.

We know that sun has angular size/diameter of ~0.53 degrees, thus shadows and light should work accordingly.

If one want's it to be realistic, looking good, artistic and what fit's the scene is different thing.

 

[BrentJ]

I was just googling tree shadows, heh, what I notice is that at the trunk, near the tree, it is a hard shadow edge, as the shadow increases in perspective on the ground it does blur outward the farther it is.

So I think a shadow with all hard edges is wrong, and a shadow with all soft edges is equally as wrong. It needs both hard edges, and soft edges, depending on the angle and perspective. The closer the shadow is to the tree, the harder, the further, the softer. That seems to be real-world.

 

[96Firebird]

can you try to get a scene with fine details and far/close shadows?

Yeah, I guess ideally I should get a scene where there is a tall building shadow and then shadows from closer objects, such as signs or trees. The building shadow should be very soft if I get the taller part of the building, and the signs or trees should be harder (relative to the building).

I did notice that shadows tend to move pretty fast in-game, because of in-game time. It is hard to to capture all 4 shadow types (CHS, PCSS, R* sharp, R* soft) without having some variance. But I'll try my best when I get some time...