The following blog post, unless otherwise noted, was written by a member of Gamasutras community.
The thoughts and opinions expressed are those of the writer and not Gamasutra or its parent company.
I assume pretty much every 3D programmer runs into Z-buffer issues
sooner or later. Especially when doing planetary rendering; the distant
stuff can be a thousand kilometers away but you still would like to see
fine details right in front of the camera.
Previously I have dealt with the problem by splitting the depth range
in two and using the first part for near stuff and another for distant
stuff. The boundary was floating, somewhere around 5km - quad-tree
tiles up to certain level were using the distant part, and the more
detailed tiles that by law of LOD are occurring nearer the camera used
the other part.
Most of the time this worked. But in one case it failed miserably -
when a more detailed tile appeared behind a less detailed one.
I was thinking about the ways to fix it, grumbling why we can't have a
Z-buffer with better distribution, when it occurred to me that maybe we
Steve Baker's document
explains common problems with Z-buffer. In short, the depth values are
proportional to the reciprocal of Z. This gives amounts of precision
near the camera but little off in the distance. Common method is then
to move your near clip plane further away, which helps but also brings
its own problems, mainly that .. the near clip plane is too far
A much better Z-value distribution is a logarithmic one. It also plays nicely with LOD used in large scale terrain rendering.
Using the following equation to modify depth value after it's been transformed by the projection matrix:
z = log(C*z + 1) / log(C*Far + 1) * w
Where C is constant
that determines the resolution near the camera, and the multiplication
by w undoes in advance the implicit division by w later in the pipeline.
Resolution at distance x, for given C and n bits of Z-buffer resolution can be computed as
log(C*Far + 1)
Res = ----------------
2^n * C/(C*x+1)
So for example for a far plane at 10,000 km and 24-bit Z-buffer this gives the following resolutions:
1m 10m 100m 1km 10km 100km 1Mm 10Mm
C=1 1.9e-6 1.1e-5 9.7e-5 0.001 0.01 0.096 0.96 9.6 [m]
C=0.001 0.0005 0.0005 0.0006 0.001 0.006 0.055 0.549 5.49 [m]
Along with the better utilization of z-value space it also (almost) gets us rid of the near clip plane.
And here comes the result.
Looking into the nose while keeping eye on distant mountains ..
10 thousand kilometers, no near Z clipping and no Z-fighting! HOORAY!
The C basically changes the resolution near the camera; I used C=1 for
the screenshots, having theoretical resolution 1.9e-6m. However, the
resolution near the camera cannot be utilized fully as long as the
geometry isn't finely tessellated too, because the depth is
interpolated linearly and not logarithmically. On models such as the
guy on the screenshots it is perfectly fine to put camera on his nose,
but with models with long stripes with vertices few meters apart the
bugs from the interpolation can be visible. We will be dealing with it
by requiring certain minimum tessellation.
Also I think I've read somewhere that some forthcoming generation of hardware will support different modes of interpolation too.
So yes, modifying C changes the resolution near the camera, setting it
to a value that gives the largest acceptable resolution may be
desirable to achieve more linear distribution in the near range and
thus minimizing the interpolation problem.
Near clip plane can be put arbitrarily 'near' but not zero because of
the 1/w division. I have put it to 0.0001m. This is using standard
perspective projection setup.
Negative Z artifact fix
Ysaneya suggested a fix
for the artifacts occurring with thin or huge triangles when Z goes
behind the camera, by writing the correct Z-value at the pixel shader
level. This disables fast-Z mode but he found the performance hit to be