Yes, you can use ReShade. Why not use the volumetric lighting shader there instead of this model?
idk, someone might want to use it.
and even though ReShade exists it can’t be controlled by the experience’s developer to make everyone have the same graphics, so a lot of developers just do these things(Volumetric Light,Ray Tracing and more) so then others can put these effects into their game so everyone(or the majority) can enjoy the same thing.(I still think that roblox should add an shader editor/component)
2 Likes
Conclusion: Roblox needs to add an shader editor.
3 Likes
There aren’t any volumetric ligthing shaders because ReShade only works in screen space which means that shaders don’t know where the light sources are, and they cannot do raycasting if the point is not on screen. So you can only have a faked one which looks bad.
1 Like
I heard somewhere on DevForum that ImageHandleAdornment can be updated faster that Gui Frames, so you should be probably able to change thier color with smaller lag.
You could also update only half or quarter of screen every frame, which will look laggy but the game won’t lag.
You could also use Parallel Luau to calculate faster. It works be multithreading the code. So let’s say that a medium end CPU has 4 cores. Not multithreaded code (that works on 1 cpu core) works by running scripts one after another. Multithreaded code works be using all the 4 cores to run code at the same time which can increase performance.
Hi, the multithreading feature is currently being worked on, about the screen update thing, if you can do that by ajusting the Pixel Render Step(if it is >=2 the frames between the calculated ones will be interpolated but will make it look pixdlated and unaccurated)
Yes, but the screen space accuracy feature does not have a dynamic “automatic” option.
Foxtrot1 was almost ready, it might come sooner than I thought.(note: the system broke and I am trying to fix it)
Even though atm we have better solutions like Volumika which do volumetric lighting way better than this, I say this resource still has potential, it has a whole lighting engine built into it the problem is its just too low resolution due to roblox limitations, hopefully once dynamic image comes out this engine can become faster.
Volumika is known to have a performance toll on low end devices. It also appears to use the Smoke instance.
This one also has a performance issue, but I might have something that can smooth out all the blocky frames:
This is a 9-pixel image (3x3 pixels). It relies on the antialiasing technologies to become smoothed like a gradient. I wonder if it would work here.
i might say this is a good start but a bad way to do it maybe try something that is more better and doesn’t take more fps
Well of course its gonna have a performance toll on low end devices, volumetric lighting itself is not meant to be ran on low end devices, same goes for other advanced lighting techniques.
Also it uses the particle emiters in order to catch the light, since technically volumetric lighting is already built into the engine, back then you could even have sharp amazing volumetric lighting thanks to beams.
But roblox for some reason just came in and removed the abbility for beams to be influenced by light sources that arent the sun, which just feels like roblox intentionally is making is suffer?
5 Likes
They were probably having some trouble hitting their performance targets… but man it looks so good! I knew all the particle effects looked different in the FiB betas than they do now!
Here’s fun part. Beams can be illuminated on Shadowmap. I’ve made fake froxels out of beams to illustrate how it’d be and made it dark for better visibility.
You can clearly see the shadow casted by “sun”.
beams are affected by Voxel lighting aswell.
lets see what happens with Future lighting.
suddenly out of luck. i have no idea why can beams be illuminated by sun in future lighting, but not from external light sources. really disappointing. the only way to get lighting information in future lighting (which yet gives us Voxel lighting result) is through particle based froxels.
unless it heavily impacts GPU utilization, i see no reason as of why not illuminate beams from external lights.
(and yea it does a decent dent on GPU-wise performance, just 23 beams imitating froxels results in 1ms Id_Transparent bar showing up in MicroProfiler)
1 Like
Roblox literally just did this to piss us off, I refuse to believe roblox did this for “Performance”, if it was truly for performance why didn’t they make this change apply to particles too, particles are literally constantly moving and can change size, shape and transparency, and beams are most of the time static. And also I have not seen a single game where beams need to be spammed everywhere to the point it can degrade performance, if anything particles are spammed everywhere because that’s their intended purpose.
Roblox had no reason to, yet they just decided to go ahead and remove this feature.
3 Likes
That is the goal the next update will surely be less laggy as I pretend to lower the ammount of raycasts and calculations, thanks for the feedback
That is a dream that I hope it becomes reality, dynamic images might bring a huge ammount of possibilities. Thanks for the feedback
2 Likes
Where’s the updates buddy? Excited to see what this will become.
Also, supposing you’re brazilian (your username), might wanna post this in the pt-br category as well.
About the update: things are a bit slow as I just faced one of my favorites subjects(but I kinda suck at it) and it is math, I am writting a new engine and I gotta say that it seems to be more performant than the previous ones, I just need now to fix some weird problems that happens with spotlights, make it work with surface lights, add color and color blending, add intensity and add the feature of a server calculated shadow mode for shadow rendering(wich might bring some good results without sacrificing a lot of performance).
I will do a post on the pt-br channel when the engine gets at least 90% ready