Splinter Cell:Chaos Theory with SM2.0

Written by Tim Smalley

August 5, 2005 | 00:00

Tags: #chaos-theory #hdr #hl2 #lost-coast #montreal #patch #scct #shader-model-20 #shader-model-30 #sm11 #sm2 #sm20 #sm3 #splinter-cell #update

Companies: #ati #nvidia #ubisoft

Artificially-adjusted ATI screen shots:

We decided to adjust the images rendered by ATI hardware in order to try and get them as close as possible to NVIDIA's hardware at once consistent setting. We found that adjusting the brightness and contrast together to +13 inside Adobe Photoshop gave the closest possible background light, which should allow us to make some more informed judgements about the quality of the HDR implementation on Shader Model 2.0.

Splinter Cell:Chaos Theory with SM2.0 More Investigations
Click to enlarge
Splinter Cell:Chaos Theory with SM2.0 More Investigations
Click to enlarge

(click to enlarge to full size)

Splinter Cell:Chaos Theory with SM2.0 More Investigations
Click to enlarge
Splinter Cell:Chaos Theory with SM2.0 More Investigations
Click to enlarge

(click to enlarge to full size)

Splinter Cell:Chaos Theory with SM2.0 More Investigations
Click to enlarge
Splinter Cell:Chaos Theory with SM2.0 More Investigations
Click to enlarge

(click to enlarge to full size)
As you can see, the ATI scenes are slightly washed out, but we've tried to keep them as close as possible. The first image shows that the glowing light bulb is slightly smaller, which is possibly down to the difference in primary render target. With a four channel 16-bit floating point buffer, there is an almost 'limitless' dynamic range for the purpose of colour data. In contrast, a 16-bit integer buffer has a 'limited' dynamic range which can lead to banding or lack of proper luminance in high dynamic range scenes.

The bottom two images don't show any sign of banding, but we do see the relatively limited dynamic range of colours available, meaning that the light rays being cast are slightly foggy in comparison that what can be achieved with a four channel FP16 primary render target. The soft shadows in the bottom image do look considerably better when the scene is brightened up, though.
Discuss this in the forums

Posted by (PTK) - Fri Aug 05 2005 17:14

I guess I’m not enough of a game graphics connoisseur because those screens all look the same to me… :)

Posted by Etacovda - Fri Aug 05 2005 17:33

/me wonders where the other thread went

interesting stuff

Posted by quadmodz - Fri Aug 05 2005 17:45

Interesting.. geezz.

Posted by Tim S - Fri Aug 05 2005 17:54

(PTK)
I guess I’m not enough of a game graphics connoisseur because those screens all look the same to me… :)
I've played with my monitor brightness and I am seeing that the images on the left are lighter than the images on the right on page 2 & 3, while page 4 shows that the lighting on the right doesn't have as larger range of colours as the screens on the left. :)

In short - there's more light on the left on P2 & P3. Page 4 - I artificially adjusted the images on the right to try and get as close as possible to the background lighting on the left images in an attempt to see the differences between the two High Dynamic Range Lighting implementations.
null
YouTube logo
MSI MPG Velox 100R Chassis Review

October 14 2021 | 15:04

In line with recent changes to data protection legislation in the UK and Europe we would like to direct you to our updated Privacy Policy here.