[cairo] path gradients and cairo
spitzak at d2.com
Thu Apr 29 13:21:22 PDT 2004
On Thursday 29 April 2004 04:05 am, Carl Worth wrote:
> I imagine OpenGL allows a mesh of colored triangles, right? Is there any
> reason we shouldn't just use that?
I'm not sure what new things are in modern OpenGL, but:
OpenGL way back at the beginning had as it's basic object a triangle with the
color specified only at the three corners, and it then Gourand shaded (linear
interpolate in screen space) those triangles. You can directly specify the
color of each vertex, this is done at the *same* time you set the xyz
coordinate (not later!!!).
Most often you would also specify a lighting and shading setup before
sending the verticies, and the stored color would actually be calculated from
the lighting, and the color (and a "normal") provided for the vertex. This
was done at the moment the vertex was specified and only the resulting color
was remembered. In addition the xyz was "perspective projected" into an xyzw
value and only this resulting value was stored.
The end result very closely resembled what you would see if you did the
lighting calculation at every pixel, but was far faster. This scheme is also
entirely non-ambiguous, a 4-sided shape would get divided into two triangles
in a predictable way (it was the caller's job to make the seam invisible) and
the linear interpolation was identical no matter how it was rotated.
Modern hardware replaces this with a "vertex shader" which is invoked for
each vertex, it can replace the perspective calculation with it's own, and
make up a set of values to store with each vertex. These could be colors, or
arbitrary arguments to the fragment shading calculation.
The Gourand shading (and texture mapping) is replaced with "fragment shaders"
which are (in effect) called for every pixel in the triangle. They are given
the results from 3 calls to the vertex, linearly interpolated between the
points in the triangle (ie they get a single set of numbers).
One concern about Cairo is that your shading is not based on the verticies
and may map very poorly to OpenGL and DirectX hardware. The main reason
vertex shaders are necessary is that vertex shaders can look at the resulting
xyzw in screen space and use that to pick the other values stored in the
vertex and then interpolated for shading. Other than that the Cairo shading
is hardly taxing the abilities of hardware shading languages and was probably
supportable by older hardware.
The reason the old hardware did not provide any way to run the shader from
the projected coordinate is that this is totally unnecessary for most 3D. The
Z can be (and is) used for fog, but it was needed for z-buffer compositing
anyway. The screen xy would only be useful for rendering a window, but that
could be done by rendering what is outside first and then drawing the window
frame atop it.
Because this is so unnecessary for 3D, I would not be suprised if modern
hardware, even though it can do it, performs poorly (perhaps blocking the
pipeline) if shaders need to look at the projected screen coordinates. This
could seriously slow things down. So it is quite possible that the design of
Cairo should be altered to assumme 3D hardware, even if you assumme totally
programmable and full-power shaders on the hardware.
,~,~,~,~ ~ ~ ~ ~
/\_ _|_========___ Bill Spitzak
~~~/\/\\~~~~~~\____________/~~~~~~~~ spitzak at d2.com
More information about the cairo