1 / 57

Interactive Ray Tracing of Point-based Models

Interactive Ray Tracing of Point-based Models. Ingo Wald MPI Informatik, Saarbrücken, Germany wald@mpi-inf.mpg.de. Motivation. Why point-based rendering ? Many advantages, but no details here at PBG But: Why point-based ray tracing ? Actually, two different questions:

merton
Download Presentation

Interactive Ray Tracing of Point-based Models

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. Interactive Ray Tracingof Point-based Models Ingo Wald MPI Informatik, Saarbrücken, Germany wald@mpi-inf.mpg.de

  2. Motivation • Why point-based rendering ? • Many advantages, but no details here at PBG • But: Why point-based ray tracing ? • Actually, two different questions: • Q1: Why ray tracing for point-based models ? • Q2: Why use point-based techniques in ray tracing ?

  3. Q1: Why Ray Tracing ? • Reason 1: Logarithmic scalability to large models • Very handy for today‘s huge models • But: For PBR not that important (multiresolution)… • Reason 2 : Image quality / shading quality • Ray traced image quality not yet standard in PBG… • But would benice to have

  4. Q2: Why Point-based techniques in Ray Tracing? • Native point-based data (acquisition) • Direct ray tracing avoids tesselation • Much simpler • And for native triangular models ? • Triangular model  Point-based model  PBRT • Does this make sense ? • Highly controversial issue amongst ray tracing researchers • RT is log. in #tris, anyway. Don‘t need multiresolution… • Many new problems with points as primitives • Consistency, efficiency, loss of information…

  5. Q2: Why Point-based techniques in Ray Tracing? Interactive ray tracing: Three recent examples

  6. Q2: Why Point-based techniques in Ray Tracing? Interactive ray tracing: Three recent examples • Example 1: Boeing 777 (350 million triangles, 40 GB data)

  7. Q2: Why Point-based techniques in Ray Tracing? Interactive ray tracing: Three recent examples • Example 2: Lawrence Livermore isosurface (8 billion voxels)

  8. Q2: Why Point-based techniques in Ray Tracing? Interactive ray tracing: Three recent examples • Example 3: Forest landscape (1.5 billion triangles)

  9. Q2: Why Point-based techniques in Ray Tracing? Interactive ray tracing: Three recent examples • Yes, can render all three already today without PB techniques • But: Doesn‘t make sense (>1G prim. for <1M pixels ?) • Too much data: Tiny camera movetotally different data • Even though image doesn‘t change at all… • Sample only every 1000th pixel  Severe aliasing • Aliasing: THE most important problem of RTRT today • Need multiresolution approach also for RT • Probably best via PB approach • Current results only intermediate step… • … towards long-term goal of multiresolution (PB)RT

  10. How to ray trace PB models ? • Problem: Zero ray-point hit probability • Rays infinitely thin • Points infitnitely thin, too • Two possible solutions • Use „thick“ rays that have volume (cones, beams, …) • Reconstruct from all points overlapping ray‘s volume • „Grow“ points to have a surface • can then be found by „thin“ ray • Long history of debate on which is better…

  11. How to ray trace PB models ? • Alternative 1: Growing rays • Experience: Tracing beams very costly (much more than rays)

  12. How to ray trace PB models ? • Alternative 1: Growing rays • Many un-answered questions • Where exactly is the hit point ? • E.g., where to start the shadow ray from ? points gathered by beam Position A Hitpoint position ?

  13. How to ray trace PB models ? • Alternative 1: Growing rays • Many un-answered questions • Where exactly is the hit point ? • How stable is the decision ? points gathered by beam Position A Hitpoint position ?

  14. How to ray trace PB models ? • Alternative 1: Growing rays • Many un-answered questions • Where exactly is the hit point ? • How stable is the decision ? • Is it consistent ? • E.g., when viewed from different angle (shadow ray) Position B (Light ?) Position A surface seen from A Same surface, different viewpoint: Same hitpoint ? Is it in shadow ? Hitpoint position ?

  15. How to ray trace PB models ? • Alternative 1: Growing rays • Many un-answered questions • Where exactly is the hit point ? • How stable is the decision? • Is it consistent ? • Too many open questions

  16. How to ray trace PB models ? • Alternative 2: Growing points • Define unique surface through points • Always consistent • Most trivial solution: Use disks/ellipses/… • Trivial

  17. How to ray trace PB models ? • Alternative 2: Growing points • Define unique surface through points • Always consistent • Most trivial solution: Use disks/ellipses/… • Trivial, but shading discontinuities (worse w/ shadows)

  18. How to ray trace PB models ? • Better: Define smooth surface • Use Adamson/Alexa‘s model • Each point xi has normal ni and radius ri of influence • Influence wi falls off with distance to xi • With wi(xi)=1 and wi(x)=0 for all |x-xi|>ri • Define weighted average position X(x) and N(x) • Define „distance“ function F(x) := ((x-X(x)).N(x) • Implicit fct F(x)=0 is smooth surface • Need: • Useful ri ‘s (not given) • Fast ray/surface intersection framework

  19. Choosing Splat Radii • Step 1: Choosing the splat radii • Too small  Holes in the model • Too large  Many regions of influence will overlap (slow) • Use Wu et al.‘s optimal subsampling technique • Wu [EG04]: Determine ri such as to • Optimally cover surface • Achieve minimal overlap Optimal solution: Use exactly that technique • Note: Can also use ‚other‘ radii • e.g., user-specified… • Might just be slower or contain holes

  20. Intersecting the Surface • Step 2: Determining the splats to intersect with • Each point x always influenced by only few xi C B D A

  21. Intersecting the Surface • Step 2: Determining the splats to intersect with • Enclose each splat‘s ROI with tight fitting box C B D A

  22. Intersecting the Surface • Step 2: Determining the splats to intersect with • Enclose each splat‘s ROI with tight fitting box • Build kd-tree over those AA boxes C B D A

  23. Intersecting the Surface • Step 2: Determining the splats to intersect with • Enclose each splat‘s ROI with tight fitting box • Build kd-tree over those AA boxes C B D A

  24. Intersecting the Surface • Step 2: Determining the splats to intersect with • Enclose each splat‘s ROI with tight fitting box • Build kd-tree over those AA boxes C B D A

  25. Intersecting the Surface • Step 2: Determining the splats to intersect with • Enclose each splat‘s ROI with tight fitting box • Build kd-tree over those AA boxes C B D A

  26. Intersecting the Surface • Step 2: Determining the splats to intersect with • Enclose each splat‘s ROI with tight fitting box • Build kd-tree over those AA boxes • Leaves: Store list of splats whose ROI overlaps cell C - - C B B B,C - A A,B A,B,C (right side incomplete) D A A -

  27. Intersecting the Surface • Step 2: Determining the splats to intersect with • Enclose each splat‘s ROI with tight fitting box • Build kd-tree over those AA boxes • Leaves: Store list of splats whose ROI overlaps cell • KD-Tree: Inherit advantages of fast triangular ray tracing • Fast traversal, occlusion culling, good kd-trees (SAH)… C - - C B B B,C - A A,B A,B,C D A A -

  28. Intersecting the Surface • Step 3: Ray/surface intersection in each voxel • Find distance t : F(t)=0 • Equidistant sampling along t • Have intersection if sgn(F(ti+1)) != sign(F(ti)) • But: Too coarse sampling can miss the surface • Optimizations: Fast SSE implementation (no details) • Quite fast, but: Still main cost factor • Further optimize kd-tree to minimize F(x) calls • Need to take closer look at kd-tree

  29. KD-Tree Post-optimizations • Observation 1: Many full cells don‘t contain surf. • Reason: KD-tree was built over ROI‘s • ROI‘s bound surface, but not closely

  30. KD-Tree Post-optimizations • Observation 1: Many full cells don‘t contain surf. • Example from before C - - C B B B,C - A A,B A,B,C A,B,C A A A,B,C

  31. KD-Tree Post-optimizations • Observation 1: Many full cells don‘t contain surf. • Actual surface only touches few voxels C - - C B B B,C - A A,B A,B,C A,B,C A,B,C A A A,B,C

  32. KD-Tree Post-optimizations • Observation 1: Many full cells don‘t contain surf. • Many non-empty cells that are not necessary C - - C B B B,C - A A,B A,B,C A,B,C A,B,C A A A,B,C

  33. KD-Tree Post-optimizations • Observation 1: Many full cells don‘t contain surf. • Many non-empty cells that are not necessary • Can make quite a difference C - - C B B B,C - A A,B A,B,C A,B,C A,B,C A A A,B,C

  34. KD-Tree Post-optimizations • Observation 1: Many full cells don‘t contain surf. • Fix: Determine min(F()) and max(F()) in each cell • Cull cells with min > 0 or max < 0 • Currently: Sample F with random x • Can produce false culling (holes) • Better: Interval arithmetic (Not implemented yet)

  35. KD-Tree Post-optimizations • Observation 2: Most cells too large • Reason: Only split planes at ROI borders • Example from earlier-on: C - - C B B B,C - A A,B A,B,C A A

  36. KD-Tree Post-optimizations • Observation 2: Most cells too large • Reason: Only split planes at ROI borders • Example from earlier-on: Green regions would suffice… C - - C B B B,C - A A,B A,B,C A A A

  37. KD-Tree Post-optimizations • Observation 2: Most cells too large • Reason: Only split planes at ROI borders • Example from earlier-on: Green regions would suffice… • Fix: Post-shrinking of cells • Cut voxel into slices, cull slices • Same problem as before: False culling… • Important: Not only fewer cell intersections… • Also: Cells much thinner: Finer sampling, fewer artifacts

  38. KD-Tree Post-optimizations • Observation 3: After shrink/cull, many cells empty • Example from earlier-on: Most cells empty after cull/shrink - - C B B,C - A A,B A,B,C A

  39. KD-Tree Post-optimizations • Observation 3: After shrink/cull, many cells empty • Example from earlier-on: Most cells empty after cull/shrink C B,C A,B A

  40. KD-Tree Post-optimizations • Observation 3: After shrink/cull, many cells empty • Example from earlier-on: Most cells empty after cull/shrink • Optimization: Post-collapse • Undo splits that don‘t make sense any more C B,C A,B A

  41. Results • Overall Framerate:1Dual-Opteron 2.4GHz, 512x512

  42. Results • Overall Framerate: ~5-15 fps @ 1PC • Nice scalability to very complex models • „ManyIffis“: 24M points w/ shadows  ~2fps@1PC

  43. Results • Overall Framerate: ~5-15 fps @ 1PC • Nice scalability to very complex models • High-quality shading • Global Illumination

  44. Results • Overall Framerate: ~5-15 fps @ 1PC • Nice scalability to very complex models • High-quality shading • Problems and limitations: • Sometimes small holes (false culling, undersampling, …) • All is static: Can‘t move points, can‘t change radii • Assumes continuous surface: • Not applicable to random point cloud (forest leaves…)

  45. Summary & Future Work • Summary • Motivated/Argued for Point-based Ray Tracing • Discussed „thin rays“ vs „thick rays“ issue • Outlined framework for Interactive PBRT • Future work • Performance & Stability • Bounding the surface, interval arithmetic, … • Multiresolution PBRT • In particular, for massively complex models

  46. Questions ?

  47. Questions ?

  48. Q1: Why Ray Tracing ? • Impact of Shadows and Reflections: Example

  49. Q2: Why Point-based techniques in Ray Tracing? • Need multiresolution approach also for RT • Trivial for „nice“ (manifold) meshes (Progressive meshes,…) • But: „problematic“ for real-world models (Forest, Boeing, …) • Should be much easier for point-based representation • Eventual goal of (our) PBRT activities • Not ray tracing (nice) point-based models • Rather: Multiresolution ray tracing using a PB approach • Reduce (in-core) data • Fight aliasing • Current activities only first step in that direction…

  50. Adamson&Alexa‘s model • Observations • Need position and normal for each point  assume as given • Need radius of influence for each point • For each x, most wi(x) will be zero • Fast computation: Need to know which... • Evaluating F(x) will be costly • Need to minimize F(x) calls • Need to quickly determine where surface can NOT be • Need to minimize number of points contributing to x  Need to minimize regions of influence (minimize ri !)

More Related