9 replies to this topic

[drean]

Description
Hi all :)

On the image you can see Esenthel Engine's Rendering Quality.

The screen comes from one of the engine tech-demo's.

The screenshot contains following effects:

-Real Motion Blur (every part of the screen that you see has its own linear and angular velocities, which calculated relatively to the camera result in appropriate blurring)

-Depth of Field (makes the unfocused areas more blurred, and focused areas more sharp, effect is designed to maintain correct blurring even on the edges between blurred and focused areas)

-Subsurface Scattering (makes the skin look more natural)

-Glow and Bloom (improves general lighting and coloring)

-Relief Mapping and Normal Mapping (adds more bump details onto the character and the ground surface)

-Cascaded Shadow Maps (up to 6 shadow maps can provide realistic shadowing even on huge visible distances)

-Soft Shadows


For more (video and other demos) you can see here http://www.esenthel.com/ or watch it directly on youtube here

[rouncer]

The render looks pretty hard to me, I dont see how there is sss involved.

[legloups]

Very impressive, damage that we do not see the creature moving...

A very good work... :o)

[KPBeast]

I honestly think that people need to stop writing these god-awful "Depth-of-Field" shaders. Seriously, does anyone think that looks good at all?

[Mihail121]

I'm not impressed at all. What your engine has is featured in many others and I can't extract some innovation from the description you gave, sorry. Aside from that, the image follows the typical path "use-shaderz-for-iffektz-that-should-look-good-n-real-but-instead-look-totally-crap". I'm sorry, this kind of depth-of-field does not occur in such manner. Nor does the bloom effect appear so bright. Nor does the motion blur. It just looks highly ugly.

Now don't take that as offense, I know your engine and I know cool things can be done with it, that really look stunning and you've also put quite a work in it so it bears a lot of positve energy. I'm following the YouTube demos closely. Just don't try to impress by using every effect in one scene with unsuitable parameters. Keep up the good work instead: your website is very polished and the screens there are completely different from what you present here. Why?

[kusma]

drean said:

-Real Motion Blur (every part of the screen that you see has its own linear and angular velocities, which calculated relatively to the camera result in appropriate blurring)

...In other words, Fake Motion Blur? :)

[rouncer]

Looks like everyones out for something more, you gotta be a good soldier to give people that.

[starstutter]

is there a reason eveyone is bashing this guy?

Whatever, I think its good, ambitious work. However, do tone down the DOF some, its hard to look at in games.

[Mihail121]

starstutter said:

is there a reason eveyone is bashing this guy?

Whatever, I think its good, ambitious work. However, do tone down the DOF some, its hard to look at in games.

Starstutter, nobody is bashing the guy, just the poor choice of screenshot, compared to the whole set of screenshots available for that engine.

[KPBeast]

starstutter said:

is there a reason eveyone is bashing this guy?

Whatever, I think its good, ambitious work. However, do tone down the DOF some, its hard to look at in games.

More like constructive criticism. At any rate, as Mihail121 pointed out, this screenshot is a very bad representation of the engine. I have seen countless screenshots taken of this engine that were much better. We've simply pointed out the areas that could be improved, and we don't want him to fall into the common pitfall of just adding shaders for reasons other than to improve the image.