Jump to content

Talk:Bloom (shader effect)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merge with Light Bloom

[edit]

I agree that this should be merged with "Light Bloom." At this time, both are used almost 100% interchangeably and have morphed into one. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.244.79.237 (talk • contribs) 2006-05-07 19:11:31 UTC.

Earliest games to use blooming

[edit]

There is a problem with "The first game to use blooming was Deus Ex: Invisible War." According to the wikipedia articles about tron 2.0 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron_2.0 ) and deus ex ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deus_Ex:_Invisible_War ) tron was released BEFORE deus ex and therefore deus ex cannot be the first game to use it. However I didn't change the article because i don't have enough knowledge about bloom and the first games which use it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Monkeyget (talk • contribs) 2006-07-04 09:02:07 UTC.

Well, it's moot now, because Ico predates them both. There may be earlier ones, too, so I softened the qualification to "one of the earliest". — Wisq (talk) 16:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just on a computer?

[edit]

Isn't this a real effect in real-world optical systems? Is there another name for that? My sense is that it is due in part to imperfections in optical systems. For example, looking through slightly-dirty lense will produce a fine image if the dynamic range of the scene is low, but a bright spot will illuminate the dirt sufficiently to wash out (bloom over) nearby parts of the image. —Ben FrantzDale 13:51, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm. Yes it is. I took it upon myself to substantially edit the content to reflect this. I never really get the ettiquette of how one does this. Does one discuss, then do? The original content was so far off base that I just did it. Hope that's ok. --74.104.47.37 05:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Better image.

[edit]

The current image of the game, "Nexuiz" is awfully subtle. How about an image where the bloom is more apparant? Like Tron 2.0 or Prince of Persia? --24.249.108.133 20:15, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, it's subtle; the problem is, most computer game screenies can't easily be used for this, because it has to fall within Fair Use, and I don't know how solid our case is here. (Though, I think the example on sprite article is pretty strong.) When I made the Nexuiz screenie, I was thinking of using DarkPlaces (fully tunable Bloom intensities), but the Quake data is still proprietary and the GPLed total conversions that don't use Quake data at all are rather weak. Nexuiz is graphically nice, but it refused to run on Darkplaces, and Nexuiz engine doesn't let me crank up the bloom levels. *sigh*
However, if there's good examples of Bloom (and lack of it, for comparison!) from Ubisoft-developed & published games like Prince of Persia, that'd be mighty swell because those can be messed with with attribution; see Template:Ubisoft-screenshot. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 17:34, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, I thought it showed the effect rather nicely. Not in thumbnail obviously, but when you click on it, it's pretty apparent. Recury 23:43, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see any bloom in the sample image. This is a terrible example. We need to find a better sample image. Maybe take a look among some of the HRDI raytracer images, which use this effect heavily in order to dramatically increase realism. --74.104.47.37 05:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Found one. Not entirely in the spirit of the original gaming-community slant of the original article, but I think it's a great example. --rerdavies 06:07, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's damn small, though. No chance of a larger/clearer image that's free? Overlord11001001 13:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whether bloom is overused or not

[edit]

Experience in the HRDI world seems to indicate that bloom is an essential component of realistic rendering. The statement that "bloom is overused", seems to me to be a matter of opinion rather than fact. Maybe bad bloom is overused. My personal opinion (rather than fact) is that bloom is necessary to display HRD properly, and will continue to play an important role in realistic rendering of any kind. Move to strike. --rerdavies 06:07, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard the complaint leveled in response to inappropriate applications of the bloom effect, such as "blinding sheep" that glow far too much considering their supposedly diffuse texture. For instance: [1] [2] an example —BlackTerror 20:00, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Overusing bloom mostly pertains to video games, and is satirized in this VG Cats strip. One popular target for this was The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess -- User:XenoL-Type 14:28, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(Note: correct link to comic is here: VG Cats) 178.194.105.139 (talk) 17:49, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well if you have ever played Oblivion, you will find it is ridiculous at times. IRL I have never had to look away because someone's face was shining too brightly at me. 71.232.85.127 (talk) 07:38, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps a mention could be made about crude or overpowering bloom instead of overused bloom. Perhaps some form of criticism section? I personally find that when bloom is correctly used, it looks pretty good, but blinding people, sheep, etcetera are too mutch.63.197.134.209 (talk) 20:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article does NOT describe the physical phenomenon of blooming.

[edit]

The blurring effect described in this article is either diffraction-limited imaging (Airy disk) or defocus (Gaussian). Blooming is a very different phenomenon. A pixel in a digital camera accumulates electrons in a "well" based on how much incoming light it is exposed to, and then the electrons are "read out" and interpreted as a signal level (pixel brightness). More photons produce more electrons in the well, until the well reaches its maximum capacity. Too many photons saturate the pixel, and some of the electrons will "spill over" into adjacent wells. This is blooming. This link has a detailed description of blooming by a manufacturer of digital imaging devices: http://learn.hamamatsu.com/articles/ccdsatandblooming.html. If the video gaming community has adapted the term "blooming" to describe defocus, then the distinction should be called out and a true article on blooming should appear in Wikipedia under the "blooming" monicker. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.18.172.11 (talk) 15:01, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Agreed to the person above! I was very confused to see how this terminology is used in the game design field, and would also appreciate a note to this effect. It would appear that the Hamamatsu link posted above is obsolete, but see e.g. this example on the APS page, as well as minor discussion on the CCD page - I do not see a full article, but could we add a link to perhaps the CCD page? --171.64.120.74 (talk) 00:36, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Bloom (shader effect). Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

  • Attempted to fix sourcing for //www.maximumpc.com/article/features/doom_dunia_visual_history_3d_game_engines?page=0,4

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:47, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bloom (shader effect). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:10, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bloom_(shader_effect)&oldid=1206340455"