The question is pretty straightforward. I'm executing DrawMeshInstancedIndirect using Unity's default quad as the mesh.
I want to know if it's possible to scale this mesh (so I can test the quality of the results with bigger and smaller mesh size) to execute the instancing.
Related
There is an empty scene with one standard cube. If you change its scale to (5;5;1), then the fps does not drop.
But if I change it to (5; 10; 1) my fps drops to ~30.
If I move the camera away from the cube with the scale (5;10;1), then the fps is again 60.
Maybe I have wrong camera settings or something else.
How to achieve high fps without moving the camera away?
p.s. The fps does not drop in the editor. Only after launching on android.
Unity version 2020.3.18f1. Tried on another version same problem.
cube with scale(5;5;1)
cube with scale(5;10;1)
cube with scale(5;10;1) and camera is distant
The problem may be due to the fact that more pixels is rendered (fragment shader is executed for every one) when the object is scaled up. The other hint is that when you move the camera far from the object the frame rate is increased as the rendered object generates fewer pixels.
As you mentioned that the program runs on Android, changing a regular shader to mobile shader may improve the performance.
From some of Unity's documentation on transforms
Performance Issues and Limitations with Non-Uniform Scaling
Non-uniform scaling is when the Scale in a Transform has different values for x, y, and z; for example (2, 4, 2). In contrast, uniform scaling has the same value for x, y, and z; for example (3, 3, 3). Non-uniform scaling can be useful in a few select cases but should be avoided whenever possible.
Non-uniform scaling has a negative impact on rendering performance. In order to transform vertex normals correctly, we transform the mesh on the CPU and create an extra copy of the data. Normally we can keep the mesh shared between instances in graphics memory, but in this case you pay both a CPU and memory cost per instance.
I'm not certain if your Z's scale matters in this case, because you're only rendering the x-y plane. I can't comment for certain on why the performance hit is reduced as you increase your camera distance. I suspect Unity has some intelligent vertex manipulation going on to simplify rendering of distant objects, saving you on CPU cost.
That being said, try to avoid non-uniform scaling. Primitives should typically only be used as placeholders.
When changing a 2d texture size to apply over an existing mesh, does it get applied evenly like the previous texture with smaller size or do I need to adjust something in the mesh as well?
Scenario: Extracted assets from an unity game and want to improve texture quality from an existing 2d texture with something I created with a higher resolution.
Thanks
I have a point-cloud and a rgb texture that fit together from a depth camera. I procedurally created a mesh from a selected part of the point-cloud implementing the quickhull 3D algorithm for mesh creation.
Now, somehow I need to apply the texture that I have to that mesh. Note that there can be multiple selected parts of the point-cloud thus making multiple objects that need the texture. The texture is just a basic 720p file that should be applied to the mesh material.
Basically I have to do this: https://www.andreasjakl.com/capturing-3d-point-cloud-intel-realsense-converting-mesh-meshlab/ but inside Unity. (I'm also using a RealSense camera)
I tried with a decal shader but the result is not precise. The UV map is completely twisted from the creation process, and I'm not sure how to generate a correct one.
UV and the mesh
I only have two ideas but don't really know if they'll work/how to do them.
Try to create a correct UV and then wrap the texture around somehow
Somehow bake colors to vertices and then use vertex colors to create the desired effect.
What other things could I try?
I'm working on quite a similar problem. But in my case I just want to create a complete mesh from the point cloud. Not just a quickhull, because I don't want to lose any depth information.
I'm nearly done with the mesh algorithm (just need to do some optimizations). Quite challenging now is to match the RGB camera's texture with the depth camera sensor's point cloud, because they of course have a different viewport.
Intel RealSense provides an interesting whitepaper about this problem and as far as I know the SDK corrects these different perspectives with uv mapping and provides a red/green uv map stream for your shader.
Maybe the short report can help you out. Here's the link. I'm also very interested in what you are doing. Please keep us up to date.
Regards
I'm trying to use ARKit's mesh scene reconstruction (with lidar) data to improve detected plane/geometry detection.
Right now, when pointing to a surface, ARKit gives me a very rough rectangle (far from actual surface's dimension). It happens almost instantly, but still far from the actual shape.
I'm trying to use this plane info, hit detection, and mesh data, to actually draw a smoothed rectangle around the detected surface. I don't expect full code, but rather just some hints of what to do.
Note: I'm using SceneKit (not RealityKit).
This is what I have so far for visualization:
Basically, I want the blue rectangle to better adjust to the real world shape by using the already available mesh data.
instead of using plane extents, use anchor.geometry
As I understand it, the standard projection model places an imaginary grid in front of the camera, and for each triangle in the scene, determines which 3 pixels its 3 corners project onto. The color is determined for each of these points, and the fragment shader fills in the rest using interpolation.
My question is this: is it possible to gain control over this projection model? For example, create my own custom distorted uv-grid? Or even just supply my own algorithm:
xyPixelPos_for_Vector3( Vector3 v ) {...}
I'm working in Unity3D, so I think that limits me to cG or openGL.
I did once write a GLES2 shader, but I don't remember ever performing any kind of "ray hits quad" type test to resolve the pixel position of a particular 3D point in space.
I'm going to assume that you want to render 3d images based upon 3d primitives that are defined by vertices. This is not the only way to render images with OpenGL but it is the most common. The technique that you describe sounds much more like Ray-Tracing.
How OpenGL Typically Works:
I wouldn't say that OpenGL creates an imaginary grid. Instead, what it does is take the positions of each of your vertices, and converts them into a different space using linear algebra (Matrices).
If you want to start playing around with this, it would be best to do some reading on Matrices, to understand what the graphics card is doing.
You can easily start warping the positions of Vertices by making a vertex shader. However, there is some setup involved. See the Lighthouse tutorials (http://www.lighthouse3d.com/tutorials/glsl-tutorial/hello-world-in-glsl/) to get started with that! You will also want to read their tutorials on lighting (http://www.lighthouse3d.com/tutorials/glsl-tutorial/lighting/), to create a fully functioning vertex shader which includes a lighting model.
Thankfully, once the shader is set up, you can distort your entire scene to your hearts content. Just remember to do your distortions in the right 'space'. World coordinates are much different than eye coordinates!