ZDoom

by **esselfortium** » Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:05 pm

Enjay wrote:Am I right in saying that, in addition, it won't work at all in OpenGL ports anyway because the lines would be clipped at floor level?

That is correct; the standard Boom glass-floor trick doesn't work in GL, either, for the same reason. As such, I wouldn't really have any expectation of this trick being emulated in GL.

by **Graf Zahl** » Fri Sep 12, 2008 1:31 pm

Since in this case there'd be nothing to obstruct them if done properly it might be doable - but this is such a godawful hack that I really feel no desire to think about it.

by **Enjay** » Fri Sep 12, 2008 1:28 pm

Am I right in saying that, in addition, it won't work at all in OpenGL ports anyway because the lines would be clipped at floor level?

by **Graf Zahl** » Fri Sep 12, 2008 1:12 pm

Using a hack to improve the visuals of another hack?

I don't think so. Maybe Randy will do it but I won't waste any time with anything that concerns TRANMAP.

by **esselfortium** » Fri Sep 12, 2008 12:30 pm

Okay, I have another request for detection and emulation. I'm not sure if it'd be feasible, but it'd be extremely nice to have...

Spoiler:

Masked flats!

This trick works by aligning translucent midtextures into the floor (or ceiling), 1 unit away from the edges of the sector, and allowing them to bleed down (or up) into it. However, instead of using normal translucent lines, these have a tranmap applied to them which causes the midtextures to only be drawn when they're being mixed with a black pixel (i.e. the spaces between the grating).

I would have used a simpler example that doesn't combine this with the glass-floor trick, but off the top of my head I can't really think of any other way to show it off as a useful feature.

The tranmap looks like this:

Spoiler:

Everything except the very top row (which is used for when black is the color that the translucency is being drawn in front of) is 0% opaque, so the midtexture isn't visible in front of those pixels at all. The top row is 100% opaque.

In effect, the midtextures are masked by the "transparent" color in front of them (or is it behind them? the illusion always messes me up), rather than by transparent pixels on the midtextures themselves.

The tranmap lump can be downloaded from here: http://sl4.poned.com/screens/tranmap-fx ... ANMASK.lmp

I don't know if this is remotely feasible to emulate, but I figured it wouldn't hurt to ask.

Thanks!

by **randi** » Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:42 pm

Graf Zahl wrote:Even that nonwithstanding I believe that this feature is a nasty trap just waiting to block potential improvements to the renderer. It is so purely and utterly locked to 8 bit graphics that problems are inevitable.

This is exactly why I never supported it. The algorithm is dead simple, but it's not forward-thinking in any way.

by **Project Shadowcat** » Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:39 pm

dr.Robotnik wrote:F-U-C-K with those TRANMAPS!they are VERY OLD!!and they arent needed anymore!!and they have modern analogues.....IMHO

Get off of my forum.

by **Gez** » Sat Sep 06, 2008 3:04 pm

dr.Robotnik wrote:F-U-C-K with those TRANMAPS!they are VERY OLD!!and they arent needed anymore!!and they have modern analogues.....IMHO

I agree. ZDoom should ditch Doom support because it's a very old game that isn't needed anymore. Instead, it should be a client for World of Warcraft.

by **esselfortium** » Sat Sep 06, 2008 12:48 pm

Graf Zahl wrote:BTW, additive should work now. At least your overbright TRANSADD now gets recognized as additive 100+100.

Wow, awesome. Thanks Graf!

by **Graf Zahl** » Sat Sep 06, 2008 12:38 pm

BTW, additive should work now. At least your overbright TRANSADD now gets recognized as additive 100+100.

by **esselfortium** » Sat Sep 06, 2008 12:25 pm

dr.Robotnik wrote:F-U-C-K with those TRANMAPS!they are VERY OLD!!and they arent needed anymore!!and they have modern analogues.....IMHO

They are if you want your maps to be compatible with anything that's not ZDoom.

by **dr.Robotnik** » Sat Sep 06, 2008 12:15 pm

F-U-C-K with those TRANMAPS!they are VERY OLD!!and they arent needed anymore!!and they have modern analogues.....IMHO

by **Graf Zahl** » Sat Sep 06, 2008 11:25 am

Aside from TRANADD it seems to work. You can output the translucency level of the maps in developer mode ('developer 1' at the console) The algorithm is rather shitty though because it only checks black on white.

by **esselfortium** » Sat Sep 06, 2008 11:03 am

Thanks for looking into this.

I don't really have great additive ones for testing, unfortunately. I experimented around with them trying to make one that was less bright than the one I screenshotted, but quickly ran into the problem that I can't just turn down the opacity on the additive layer, or it won't be able to form bright whites anymore. I messed around with brightness/contrast of the additive layer, trying to get something that worked, but I just ended up with problems. If I could figure out a simple way to generate correct ones for different levels, it'd be no problem. Maybe in Photoshop working in RAW format or something like that, where the brighter-than-white information would be hopefully preserved? I dunno.

Anyway, here are basic tranmaps for 0%, 18%, 35%, 85%, 100% translucency, and my severely overbright (bleh) additive blending: http://sl4.poned.com/screens/tranmap-fx ... anmaps.wad

by **Graf Zahl** » Sat Sep 06, 2008 10:28 am

esselfortium wrote: As far as I see it, this is exactly the problem. So many people are used to running Boom-compatible maps in ZDoom that it's now effectively locking out features that could otherwise be used.

PrBoomGL also can't use it so it's not just a ZDoom problem.

My original intent when learning about tranmaps (as I knew nothing about them prior to last night) was to make some translucent lines more opaque so that they'd look how I wanted them to. I notice that you mentioned here that ZDoom guesses the translucency amount from normal Boom-generated tranmaps, but as far as I could tell it didn't have any effect at all. 18%, 35%, and 85% translucency all seemed to show up identically in ZDoom, though the difference was very obvious in other ports.

Zdoom does a rough analysis of the translucency level - but only for Doom format maps - and due to lack of testing material I can't say anything about its quality.
If you can give me your tranmaps (and preferably additive ones with different levels, too) I'll see what can be done with those.

That map isn't for my project, but someone else's, and I doubt he'll want to release it if it's not compatible with ZDoom, even though its goal is just to be Boom-compatible. You see where this causes problems? It's not a huge issue IMO if weird custom tranmaps can't be supported (or if they can't be supported in GL, which is an obvious limitation), but basic ones don't seem to be emulated either.

I agree that those that can be easily identified should at least work to a certain degree.

ZDoom

Boom TRANMAP lumps, and why.

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: Boom TRANMAP lumps, and why.

Re: Boom TRANMAP lumps, and why.

Re: Boom TRANMAP lumps, and why.

Re: Boom TRANMAP lumps, and why.

Re: Boom TRANMAP lumps, and why.

Re: Boom TRANMAP lumps, and why.

Re: Boom TRANMAP lumps, and why.

Re: ...

Re: ...

Re: Boom TRANMAP lumps, and why.

Re: Boom TRANMAP lumps, and why.

Re: ...

...

Re: Boom TRANMAP lumps, and why.

Re: Boom TRANMAP lumps, and why.

Re: Boom TRANMAP lumps, and why.