How does this "on the fly" approach compare in terms of performance to the other texture application techniques we discussed before?
JustinHuey1
On the fly approach will definitely be more expensive since we are constantly computing new information every time rather than using past information or stored information. This is in contrast to something like mip maps where we pre computed versions of the texture
red-robby
This seems computationally more expensive, as JustHuey1 described. But I wonder if specially designed hardware could mitigate this difference? It's true that the use of stored textures, while not computationally expensive in terms of instruction count, can involve the need to make (very) slow memory accesses. The saving in memory usage in general is another point worth mentioning.
sberkun
Some interesting procedural textures include noise textures (like the one shown; a noise texture can be made to look similar to granite rock), voronio textures, and musgrave textures (which can be made to look like marble).
How does this "on the fly" approach compare in terms of performance to the other texture application techniques we discussed before?
On the fly approach will definitely be more expensive since we are constantly computing new information every time rather than using past information or stored information. This is in contrast to something like mip maps where we pre computed versions of the texture
This seems computationally more expensive, as JustHuey1 described. But I wonder if specially designed hardware could mitigate this difference? It's true that the use of stored textures, while not computationally expensive in terms of instruction count, can involve the need to make (very) slow memory accesses. The saving in memory usage in general is another point worth mentioning.
Some interesting procedural textures include noise textures (like the one shown; a noise texture can be made to look similar to granite rock), voronio textures, and musgrave textures (which can be made to look like marble).