Interactive Stereo Rendering For NonPlanar Projections of 3D Virtual Environments

1 / 18
About This Presentation
Title:

Interactive Stereo Rendering For NonPlanar Projections of 3D Virtual Environments

Description:

Interactive Stereo Rendering For NonPlanar Projections of 3D Virtual Environments –

Number of Views:83
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 19
Provided by: cgsHpiUn
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Interactive Stereo Rendering For NonPlanar Projections of 3D Virtual Environments


1
Interactive Stereo RenderingFor Non-Planar
Projections of 3D Virtual Environments Matthias
Trapp, Haik Lorenz, Jürgen Döllner Hasso-Plattner-
Institute, University of Potsdam,
Germany GRAPP 2009International
Conference on Computer Graphics Theory and
Applications Lisboa, Portugal
2
Motivation
  • Immersive Digital Environments
  • Real-time rendering
  • High field-of-view
  • Stereoscopy
  • Non-planar projections
  • Not supported by rendering hardware
  • Single-center of projection only
  • Contribution
  • Feasibility study for stereoscopy of non-planar
    projections
  • Compare image-based geometry-based approaches

3
Anaglyph Results
Cylindrical Projection
4
Anaglyph Results
Spherical Projection
5
Rendering Non-Planar Projections
  • Geometry-based Approach (GBA) Lorenz and Döllner
    2008
  • Projection computed on a per-vertex basis
  • Dynamic mesh refinement to ensure sufficient
    on-screen vertex density
  • Requires DX 10 hardware
  • Image-based Approach (IBA) Trapp and Döllner
    2008
  • Normal based image warping
  • Dynamic cube map screen-aligned quad
  • Fragment shader functionality (DX 9a)
  • GBA IBA fully hardware accelerated

6
Previous Work Image-based Approach
  • Projection function computes cubemap sampling
    normal
  • Example horizontal cylindrical projection
  • 3-Phase rendering process
  • Create/update dynamic cubemap
  • Setup projection shader
  • Render screen-aligned quad

7
Stereoscopy for Non-Planar Projections
  • Stereo ? Image pair ? Angle depth disparity
  • Planar projections render two images using two
    virtual cameras
  • Basic idea for image-based non-planar
    projections
  • Render two cubemaps (left right eye)
  • Derive projection image pair
  • Implementation problem
  • Optimal Single-Pass Render to Dual-Cubemap
  • Not supported by current hardware generation
  • Cannot bind two cubemap textures to a single
    active framebuffer object
  • Work around layered rendering using geometry
    shader

8
Single-Pass Render to Dual-Cubemap
9
Layered Rendering Geometry Shader
10
Layer Sampling
  • Problem
  • In Normal Vector
  • Out 2D texture coordinates layer ID
  • Reference Sampling (RSA)
  • Using Reference Cube-Map
  • Additional memory consumptions
  • Sampling artifacts on texture border
  • Analytic Sampling (ASA)
  • Re-implement OpenGL fixed-function
  • 54 shader instructions

11
Stereo Rendering
  • Applied as post-processing pass(es)
  • Active Stereo Rendering (shutter glasses)
  • Frame sequential
  • Using OpenGL quad buffer
  • Two full-screen passes (left and right eye),
    multiplexed in time
  • Passive stereo rendering (anaglyph)
  • Single full-screen pass
  • Sampling two cubemaps and mix samples
  • Apply color correction matrix Zhang 2006

12
IBA Performance Evaluation (Anaglyph)
13
GBA-IBA Comparison Rendering Performance
14
GBA-IBA Comparison Image Quality
  • GBA is superior over IBA
  • Cause cubemap sampling artifacts
  • Problematic for wireframe-rendering or hatching
    techniques (NPR)

GBA
IBA
15
GBA-IBA Comparison Memory Footprint
  • GBA - View-dependent
  • t input triangles
  • r average rate of primitive amplification
  • i intermediate data (i 16)
  • IBA Static footprint
  • l number of texture layers
  • b precision per color channel
  • s texture resolution
  • c number of color channels
  • Example 180 cylindrical projection
  • OGBA 69 MB l 4, b 4 (32bit), s 1024,
    c 4
  • For higher FOV OIBA lt OGBA

16
GBA-IBA Comparison Binary Wrap Up
17
Conclusions Future Work
  • Summary
  • Interactive stereoscopic rendering for non-planar
    projections
  • Common upper bound medium scene complexity
    (500,000 triangles)
  • GBA outperforms IBA
  • IBA much easier to implement/use
  • Future Work
  • Increase IBA rendering performance by re-using
    information
  • IBA Image quality
  • Derive omni-directional stereo projections

18
Thank You! Questions? Contact Matthias
Trapp matthias.trapp_at_hpi.uni-potsdam.de Haik
Lorenz haik.lorenz_at_hpi.uni-potsdam.de Jürgen
Döllner juergen.doellner_at_hpi.uni-potsdam.de Comp
uter Graphics Systems Group www.hpi.uni-potsdam.d
e/3d Researchgroup 3D-Geoinformation www.3dgi.d
e
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com