460 likes | 595 Views
Spatially Immersive Visualization Systems (an update). Prof. Frederic I. Parke Visualization Sciences Texas A&M University. Project History. ~1990 Air Force project @ NYIT ~1998 current concept (w/Ergun) 2000 CRIC funding (~$5k) 2002 TITF funding ($165k) 2005 NSF MRI funding ($500k).
E N D
Spatially Immersive Visualization Systems(an update) Prof. Frederic I. Parke Visualization Sciences Texas A&M University Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Project History • ~1990 Air Force project @ NYIT • ~1998 current concept (w/Ergun) • 2000 CRIC funding (~$5k) • 2002 TITF funding ($165k) • 2005 NSF MRI funding ($500k) Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Spatially Immersive Systems • Multiple images projected on surrounding surfaces • Often use stereo images • (active) Sequential images • (passive) Dual stereo images • Provide interaction modes • May use position tracking Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Example -‘Cave’ Systems • up to 6 surfaces of a small room or cubical environment • typically systems use only 3 or 4 walls Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Immersive Environments Major Components • the computational “fabric” • the display “surfaces” • user interaction and tracking Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Visual Computing Clusters • Extended Cluster Concept • Use ‘visual’ computing nodes • Each computational node has a graphics processor • Each node drives a small ‘facet’ of the total display surface Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Related Prior Work • Tiled Displays/PowerWalls • Princeton • Argonne National Lab • UNC-CH • Multi-Graphics Project • Stanford Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
What’s the ‘Ideal’ Display Surface? • Is probably task specific • One concept is a seamless surrounding sphere with high resolution wrap around dynamic images, high update rate, and high complexity modeled environments Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Display Geometries • We want better geometric approximations to the ‘ideal’ sphere • The CAVE is a poor approximation • A number of polyhedron configurations are better Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Polyhedron Display Systems • Multiple display facets • Each facet driven from one (or two) visual computing node • Low cost per facet • High aggregate performance • High aggregate resolution Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Our configuration of interesta 24 facet polyhedron Trapezoidal Icositetrahedra Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
24 Facet polyhedron as approximation to a sphere Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
24 Facet projector placement Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Simulated cross-sectional view of a 5 meter 24 facet display environment Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Another possible configurationa 60 faceted polyhedra Pentagonal Hexcontahedra Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Our objectives • Useful and effective • Integration into ‘workflows’ • ‘Low’ cost • Commodity components • Reasonable performance Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Challenges • Software Development/Integration • Distributed Data Management • Workflow Integration • Display Synchronization / Stereo Display • Physical Structure/Environment • Suitable Projection Systems • Display Calibration Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Stereo Display Passive anaglyphic – red /cyan (one proj) polarization (two projectors) Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Physical Structures Screen frame design Minimal ‘seams’ Projector placement Optical folding Projector mounts Heat ‘ripples’ Screen materials Optical properties Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Image Compensation • Geometric correction • off axis & projector distortion • ‘Image stability’ • explored several approaches • Intensity / color correction Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
TheProblem Image alignment on individual projectors We Want… We Get… Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Basic Approach • Compute the correct image • Use as texture on a poly mesh • Pre-distort mesh to compensate for geometric projection distortion Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
GPU based solutions • Instead of relying on OpenGL default texturing, control the warping through the GPU • Create a 2D displacement texture • Access the displacement texture to get an offset, then access the image with the UV coordinates and the offset Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
GPU based extensions Color correction Easy to hue/color shift texel values Brightness correction Easy to adjust the brightness of texels Intensity falloff correction by altering brightness based on a grayscale calibration image Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Structural Prototypes We have developed a series of structural prototypes We learned something from each! Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
3/10 scale physical model using 24 identical facets Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
3/10 ScalePrototype Architecture Building Atrium ~ 5’ diameter (Mid – 2001) Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
¾ Scale Presentation Prototype Completed May 2002 Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Half of 24 facet structural frame Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Structure with projected images Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Series of Development Systems • 3 screen prototypes 3/4 scale and full scale • 5 screen prototype (full scale) • 7 screen prototype (1/2 scale) (Currently in development) • Software (two generations) ‘3Dengine’ and ‘Guppy3D’ Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Rear view of 4 screen structure section Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Initial 3 facet development system in use Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Alternative 3 Facet System Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Operational 5 Facet System Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Next – Two 7 Facet Systems Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Budget for each 7 Facet System • 7 x $17.75k = ~$124k • plus ~ $36k for a control/interface computer, interaction devices, networking, sound, installation, etc… • Total ~ $160k Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Per Facet Budget (2005) For each facet ~ $17.75k • 2 Visual computing nodes ~ $9k • 2 Display projectors ~ $3.5k • Screen and structure ~$3.8k • Misc. components ~$1.45k Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Application Projects • Architecture ‘Ranch’ • Montezuma Castle A Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Architecture ‘Ranch’ Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Architecture ‘Ranch’ on 3 facet system Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Architecture Ranch on the 5 facet system Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Montezuma Castle A Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Montezuma Castle A Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University
Montezuma Castle A Visualization Sciences, Texas A&M University