Talk:High-dynamic-range rendering

message: Would anyone object to a discussion cleanup? I think it would be far better to mirror the contents of the actual article and follow that method. This is getting pretty messy! ~Xytram~ 19:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion Cleanup? 

message: "Many monitors ... do not support floating point constrast values."
Of course not. Because they are analog devices. (rolleyes) —the preceding unsigned comment is by 195.210.242.74 (talk • contribs) 13:38, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Except, of course, for the HDMI or DVI ones that have digital inputs. Which support digital integer values, but not digital floating point values. --Nantonos 22:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Floating point

message: Shouldn't this section only include games that have already been released? —the preceding unsigned comment is by Whursey (talk • contribs) 20:12, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why, as long as the games are indicated as unreleased. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 05:56, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of games that support HDR 

message: Some older games that are do not specifically use DirectX 9.0c features should not really be counted as "HDR" games. I think a common mistake for some is that they think advanced blooming techniques (which may make the surface of an object brighter) counts as HDR, but blooming is only a part of HDR.
I'll admit, I can't even figure out if a game is using HDR or not.
The simulated HDR effects used in certain console games may share many characteristics with 'true' hdr rendering, beyond mere light bleed ('bloom') effects. For example, see Spartan Total Warrior and Shadow of the Colossus on PS2.
:For me, as a photographer, I think I've never seen HDR in games. For me HDR is that when I expose the insides of the church and light is coming thru open windows, I can see the blue sky outside (taking around 6 pictures, mapping the pictures so that both the inside AND the outside is exposed correctly).
:Not over-exposed bright-white windows what we get normally without applying HDR.
:And this is what I see in the games. Big bloom around windows which to me look exactly like the normal/low dynamic range pictures what we get without cams exposing for the insides.
:I don't think it matters if you manipulate the picture in 32 bits if you're then still letting the over-exposure get the best of you... 221.186.144.238 05:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Blooming really has nothing to do with HDR, it is a non-correct, but good enough looking approximation for the convolution effect of real cameras (and of the eye, which is an aperture device, too). Bloom should only be visible on very strongly lit areas, hence the connection with HDR. Unluckily, a lot of game designers have such a hype about bloom that they put in a much too strong effect, causing the scene to look like a cheap 1970s soft porn movie.
What HDR is about (as the previous poster already said) is having a much larger difference between bright and dark image areas than 8 bits can offer. Because hardly any output device can reproduce the range that our eye can distinguish (or even the range that appears in nature), we have to use tone mapping to compress this range, effectively resulting in a LDR image. Black can't be more black and white can't be more white.
However, it still matters that we process the information in high dynamic range, since we can dynamically modify the exposure depending on what we look at (and the overall brightness), much like the human eye does, too.
This results in a much more natural look and feel: if you look at a bright window in a moderately lit room, the previously dark interior of the room apparently fades to black, and if you turn your head, the previously black room reveals detail which apparently was not there before, as the eye adapts to the situation.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.35.150.102 (talk) 17:37, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Blooming is very important to HDR, without it the only other perceptible effect is to lose colour banding from lack of precision. Since it is how the higher luminance values (e.g. 2.0) are represented differently to the "old" range (e.g. 1.0) its a key part of HDRR, not just an unrelated post-processing effect (although when done badly it often is). Unbloomed HDR images look just like LDR to the uninitiated, i.e. computer game players... this might have something to do with all the (overly) heavy blooms that get used. --Jheriko (talk) 07:54, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discerning HDR with "illusions" of HDR 

message: ===the ATI FireGL v5250?===
The v5000 and v5100 cards are included on the table, but the v5250 is not. Is this an oversight, or does the card not support HDRR? I've done a bit of research, but I can't seem to find out. Thatcrazycommie 15:20, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm pretty sure it's not just advanced blooming either. —Ilyanep (Talk) 18:00, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Graphics cards which support HDRR

message: The v5000 and v5100 cards are included on the table, but the v5250 is not. Is this an oversight, or does the card not support HDRR? I've done a bit of research, but I can't seem to find out. Thatcrazycommie 15:20, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: the ATI FireGL v5250?

message: Radeon X300 isn't the oldest card that supports HDR. I just played Lost Coast with a Radeon 9600 and it showed up (beautifully, I might add). —Ilyanep (Talk) 17:57, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm pretty sure it's not just advanced blooming either. —Ilyanep (Talk) 18:00, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: HDR Support

message: Maybe it should be noted that RD3xx and below does not support half-float blending?
On Paul Debevec site, you can see HDR was possible even on NV15. It's not that HDR wasn't possible before: it is that it's just much easier with this machinery ready to go (I don't say it: he writes on his page). 83.176.29.246 11:13, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cards for HDR

message: I found this website http://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb which includes ATI, Matrox, nVidia and XGI GPU specs. As stated on this website, "all cards with SM2.0 support HDR". The GPUDB pages shows the chipsets DirectX, Pixel & Vertex shaders specification. I'm not sure which needs to be supported (i.e. Matrox Parhelia supports PS1.3 and VS2.0). Might be useful if someone could have a look and we can get the cards list updated. ~Xytram~ 14:57, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: GPU Database

message: The new ATI DX10/SM 4 cards are almost being released, so I've added them to the list with SM 4.0 cards with HDR.
That are: HD 2900 series (XTX and XT), HD 2600 series (XT and Pro) and HD 2400 series (no info) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.116.90.70 (talk) 17:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: DX10 HDR Cards

message: I did some thinking and this crossed my mind, and it probably should've been obvious.
I believe that DirectX 8 and beyond is another name for Shader Model. If OpenGL coorelates to the Shader Model we hear from, then it'll break the argument. Anyway, probably when DX8.1 came out, we get Shader Model 1.1, such as Deus Ex: Invisible War which requires DX8.1, but doesn't need 9.0 (even though it comes with it). DirectX 9.0 saw the release of Shader Model 2.0. I've heard many reports though that the Radeon 9700/9800 series (which includes 9500 and 9600) litterally tore through GeForce 5 series on all Shader Model 2.0 benchmarks from 3D Mark 03, but I wouldn't know, and I'm willing to bet that Source thinking the GeForce 5 series is a DX 8.1 card is a behind the scenes deal with ATi and Valve.
Anyway, when DirectX 9.0b came out, that was probably when Shader Model 2.0b came out, seeing how there's a relation to the versions. (If DirectX 8 is Shader Model 1.0, DirectX 8.1 is Shader Model 1.1, and DirectX 9 is Shader Model 2.0).
Of course, the pattern is broken when DirectX 9.0c is Shader Model 3.0. But I hear DirectX 10 will only add a geometry shader, not a new Shader Model. XenoL-Type 22:11, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shader Model history 

message: My god this whole article reads like it was written by a bunch of teenage gamers showing off their flashy new graphics cards. You do know that HDRI was pioneered in 1985 by Greg Ward? Probably before most of the authors of this page were born. I've tried to clear up some of the explainations in this article, but there's a lot more to be done. Although there's already an HDRI article, so perhaps this article could be renamed to make it clear that it's just about real-time rendering done with fragment shaders in modern GPU's. Imroy 12:02, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, this article seriously needs to be rewritten. Qutezuce 20:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't see the need to rename the article; the use of "rendering" in the title should be sufficient in describing that HDRR doesn't involve photography or other non-electronic image processing. May I also add that HDRR should cover any form of computer graphics application besides those from computer and video games, and little is covered about it here at the moment. In addition, I see way too many game screenshots; some of them have to go. ╫ ２５ ◀RingADing▶ 17:29, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just games? 

message: I tagged the graphics cards section for cleanup because I think there's a preference in WP:MOS for not using color codes. --Christopherlin 07:24, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup February 2006 

message: "This means the brightest white ( a value of 255 ) is only 256 times darker than the darkest black ( a value of 0 )."
I'm tired so I don't dare editing, but, shouldn't it rather be : This means the darkest black ( a value of 0 ) is only 256 times darker than the brightest white ( a value of 255 )?
:Yes, I fixed it. Thanks. Qutezuce 01:44, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So you resolved the divide by zero problem, eh? Last time I checked black is infinitely darker than any other colour value... --Jheriko (talk) 07:55, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  got it wrong? 

message: This is a placeholder for a comment that I withdrew (redundant information).  Remove if required. --CCFreak2K 10:53, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other programs that use HDR. 

message: In the section High_dynamic_range_rendering#Limitations the article currently seems to confuse monitor contrast ratio with dynamic range ratio (with only the latter being in association with what is discussed in this article). A display/monitor/beamer can have a contrast ratio as high as 10000:1 while still having a poor dynamic range ratio (think of a display that can display a very dark black and and a very bright white but only comparatively few grey steps between this black and white as an example for a display with good monitor contrast ratio and bad dynamic range ratio). 
I would favor a clear separation of those two terms so there is no confusion. --Abdull 18:01, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contrast ratio confusion 

message: In January 2002 jitspoe released an "automatic brightness" Quake2 engine which imploys an early method of HDR. The screen's brightness adjust according to the avg brightness of the pixels on the screen. Could this possibly be included? download (on fileplanet, unfortunately) CheapAlert 21:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Precursor to HDR? 

message: I've noticed that this paragraph is being changed. I think it could be better worded overall - since its quite confusing.
The first paragraph starts "Without HDRR..." and during the paragraph is changes to HDRR 'enabled'. Then the second paragraph starts "...rendered with HDR".
I'll reword it here, so people can make their own changes/comments before we change the articles version. Anything in bold below I've modified from the original wording.
---
Without HDRR, the sun and most lights are clipped to 100% (1.0 in the framebuffer). When this light is reflected the result must then be less than or equal to 1, since the reflected value is calculated by multiplying the original value by the surface reflectiveness, usually in the range 0 to 1. This gives the impression that the scene is dull or bland. 
However, using HDRR, the light produced by the sun and other lights can be represented with appropriately high values, exceeding the 1.0 clamping limit in the frame buffer, with the sun possibly being stored as high as 60000. When the light from them is reflected it will remain relatively high (even for very poor reflectors), which will be clipped to white or properly tonemapped when rendered. Also, the detail on both the monitor and the poster would be preserved, without placing bias on brightening or darkening the scene.
An example of the differences between HDR & LDR Rendering can be seen in the above example, specifically the sand and water reflections, on Valve's Half-Life 2: Lost Coast which uses their latest game engine "Valve Source engine".
~Xytram~ 13:13, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accurate reflection of light 

message: I understand why it would have been removed, the list would be getting too large now, though, would it not be worthwhile listing the games that use SM2.0 HDR?
I'm sure that list would be rather small 193.60.167.75 15:29, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  HDR game list 

message: Specifically, this section:
: One of the few monitors that can display in true HDR is the BrightSide Technologies HDR monitor, which has a simultaneous contrast ratio of around 200,000:1 for a brightness of 3000 cd/m2, measured on a checkerboard image. In fact this higher contrast is equivalent to a ANSI9 contrast of 60,000:1, or about 60 times higher that the one of a TFT screen (about 1000:1). The brightness is 10 times higher that the one of the most CRT or TFT.
It looks like it's aimed at advertising the BrightSide Technologies monitor, without mentioning any other manufacturers that make the monitors. Could someone more knowledgeable about this please fix this? Thanks. Mike Peel 23:09, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some of this article sounds like advertising 

message: Anyone know a good place for a good explanation of the various types of HDR (FP16, FP10, Nao32, etc)? Derekloffin 20:57, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Specific types of HDR rendering 

message: Quote from the article:
"The development of HDRR into real time rendering mostly came from Microsoft's DirectX API."
I reckon that I remember ID Software publications (smaller articles on the net) stating that they require graphics card vendors to include 32bit resolution colour handling in order to actually proceed with further development of hdr on a hardware based scheme. Could this please be verified in order to get it straight? And also I believe that it was well before DirectX actually began supporting HDR.
AFAIK they did it purely in software these days (Quake 3 engine) without supportive hardware nor software APIs, aka DirectX 9.0?, being available.
Besides that, ID Software or some of its main representatives also is authoritative, besides others, in that they actually drive on development of existing graphics card technologies in both hardware and software. 
Besides that also, HDR and other similar effects are all due to appropriate shader programming and by that post-processing of the currently rendered scene. Therefore, DirectX should be seen as only [the first] API incorporating the possibility to actually do HDR rendering.
:Actualy HDR has almost always been possible on hardware (e.g. Voodoo cards etc...) for small scenes and tests through clever hacks, its just not been practical for production. Just like most other shader effects... shaders just make it a ton easier to do. --Jheriko (talk) 07:58, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please Verify 

message: This article seems quite bias towards DirectX, it is obvious that most HDR rendering engines are written for DirectX at the moment this does not mean that its not possible in, for example, opengl.
Maybe it would be worth adding a new section Development of HDRR through OpenGL or words to that effect to detail the history of HDRR and non-DirectX paths? ~Xytram~ 19:22, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DirectX bias 

message: This article seems to jumble together different things:
- Rendering using Images Based Lighting, as shown by in Debevec's work and widely used as a lighting technique in 3D rendering. Image Based Lighting is most realistically done using HDR images. In this use, the HDR image data is an input file to the 3D rendering process, one of the source texture maps.
- High Dynamic Range output from a 3D rendering process, which can involve a renderer outputing floating point data into a file format such as as (most popularly) OpenEXR. This allows for realistic blurs, blooms, and optical effects to be simulated during compositing, allows more latitude for lighting adjustments during compositing, and it makes tone mapping possible when the image is finally converted into a viewable dynamic range. The article focuses on a feature of some game engines that compute or store HDRI illumination data so that camera exposure changes and optical effects can be simulated in games. This should really just be a sub-section of the overall discussion of High Dynamic Range rendering.
(If these things aren't going to be fixed, then maybe the title of the page should be changed to "High Dynamic Range Rendering (in Video Games)" and people interested in high-end graphics should just add to the main entries on High Dynamic Range Imagery and to the existing stub on Image Based Lighting.)
Jeremybirn 14:42, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation needed on topics and techniques. 

message: In the current example given for tone mapping (from DoD: Source), the affected area is very small, and the effect isn’t very pronounced. —Frungi 04:32, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad example of tone mapping 

message: :Image:Dodtmio.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 13:47, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Dodtmio.jpg

message: "In the HDR rendering on the near right" - where are the images?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.203.230.140 (talk) 10:53, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing images? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on High-dynamic-range rendering. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071011004622/http://ati.amd.com/products/Radeonhd2400/specs.html to http://ati.amd.com/products/radeonhd2400/specs.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080701085758/http://ati.amd.com/products/Radeonhd4800/index.html to http://ati.amd.com/products/radeonhd4800/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110307074455/http://www.unrealengine.com/features/rendering to http://www.unrealengine.com/features/rendering/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070624212106/http://www.gsulinux.org/~plq/ to http://www.gsulinux.org/~plq
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:21, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on High-dynamic-range rendering. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110323182005/http://source.valvesoftware.com/rendering.php to http://source.valvesoftware.com/rendering.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:01, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified