Does anyone know any method to remove ghosting in volumetric lighting?

When light move it leaves trail behind, i would like to remove it. Volumetrics are Bart Wronski style (in frustum) with exponential temporal accumulation.

I have tried neighborhood clamp, Karis and variance clipping, both remove ghosting but also introduce other artifacts.

  • $\begingroup$ Volumetric lighting can often be done through analytics, which can remove the need for any temporal correction. What kind of light are you using? Any homogeneous lighting, linear/fixed falloff lighting is able to be represented with out such ghosting artifacts. $\endgroup$
    – Krupip
    Oct 15, 2019 at 21:01

2 Answers 2


Temporal by definition will ghost. I’d limit past frame sampling, apply weight < 0.5, limit movement etc.

  • $\begingroup$ Yep, and that why there are techniques like neighborhood clamping to eliminate ghosting but it works poorly with volumetrics. So I am looking for something targeted at volumetric, maybe changing weight according to prev frame and current. Changing weight to lower constant value won't help because trails are still noticeable and quality of volumetric is reduced. $\endgroup$
    – Derag
    Dec 5, 2018 at 9:26
  • $\begingroup$ I’d also try decreasing resolution of volume rendertarget and just work with it and remove temporal altogether. For fast movements it should look ok. $\endgroup$
    – Alexey L
    Dec 5, 2018 at 20:13
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Unlike answers, comments don't always stay around forever, so it's worth editing the answer to include this additional useful information. $\endgroup$ Dec 8, 2018 at 23:06

As a work around this, what I did was to separate static and dynamic lights, have the static illumination go through temporal accumulation and dynamic illumination not (and use a non-temporal de-noising method).

There could still be artifacts, especially on far-away dynamic lights, but could still be useful. I did this in a game where the flashlight was fixed in view-space, so in fact no denoising was even necessary.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.