1 / 15

Appearance Models for Graphics

n. a. a. da. Appearance Models for Graphics. COMS 6998-3 Brief Overview of Reflection Models. Assignments. E-mail me name, status, Grade/PF. If you don’t do this, you won’t be on class list. [and give me e-mails now] Let me know if you don’t receive e-mail by tomorrow

JasminFlorian
Download Presentation

Appearance Models for Graphics

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. n a a da Appearance Models for Graphics COMS 6998-3 Brief Overview of Reflection Models

  2. Assignments • E-mail me name, status, Grade/PF. If you don’t do this, you won’t be on class list. [and give me e-mails now] • Let me know if you don’t receive e-mail by tomorrow • E-mail me list of papers to present (rank 4 in descending order). Must receive by Fri or you might be randomly assigned. • Next week, e-mail brief descriptions of proposed projects. Think about this when picking papers

  3. Today Appearance models • Physical/Structural (Microfacet: Torrance-Sparrow, Oren-Nayar) • Phenomenological (Koenderink van Doorn)

  4. n a a da Masking Interreflection Shadowing dA Symmetric Microfacets Brdf of grooves simple: specular/Lambertian Torrance-Sparrow: Specular Grooves. Specular direction bisects (half-angle) incident, outgoing directions Oren-Nayar: Lambertian Grooves. Analysis more complicated. Lambertian plus a correction

  5. Phenomenological BRDF model Koenderink and van Doorn • General compact representation • Domain is product of hemispheres • Same topology as unit disk, adapt basis • Zernike Polynomials

  6. Paper presentations • Torrance-Sparrow (Kshitiz) • Oren-Nayar (Aner) • Koenderink van Doorn (me, briefly)

  7. Phenomenological BRDF model Koenderink and van Doorn • General compact representation • Preserve reciprocity/isotropy if desired • Domain is product of hemispheres • Same topology as unit disk, adapt basis • Outline • Zernike Polynomials • Brdf Representation • Applications

  8. Zernike Polynomials • Optics, complete orthogonal basis on unit disk using polynomials of radius • R has terms of degree at least m. Even or odd depending on m even or odd • Orthonormal, using measure dd n-|m| even |m|n Cool Demo: http://wyant.opt-sci.arizona.edu/zernikes/zernikes.htm

  9. |m| 0 1 2 n |m|  n |m|  n 0 n-|m| must be even |m|  n n-|m| must be even 1 n-|m| must be even n-|m| must be even 2

  10. m>0:cos(m) m=0:sqrt(2) m<0:sin(m) azm= Hemispherical Zernike Basis • Measure Disk: Hemisphere: sin()dd • Set dd

  11. BRDF representation • Reciprocity: aklmn=amnkl

  12. BRDF representation • Reciprocity: aklmn=amnkl • Isotropy: Dep. only on  = |i-r| Expand as a function series of form cos(m[i-r]) • Can define new isotropic functions • Symmetry (Reciprocity): alnm= anlm

  13. BRDF Representation: Properties • First two terms in series • 5 terms to order 2,14 to order 4, 55 order 8 • Lambertian: First term only • Retroreflection: ln • Mirror Reflection: (-1)m ln • Very similar to Fourier Series alnm = l0 n0 m0 alnm = ln alnm = (-1)mln

  14. Applications • Interpolating, Smoothing BRDFs • Fitting coarse BRDFs (e.g. CURET). Authors: Order 2 often sufficient • Extrapolation • Some BRDF models can be exactly represented (Lambertian, Opik) • Others to low order after filtering/truncation • High-order terms are typically noisy

  15. Discussion/Analysis • Strong unified foundation • Spectral analysis interesting in own right • Ringing!! Must filter • Don’t handle BRDF features well • Specularity requires many terms • Theoretically superior to spherical harmonics but in practice?

More Related