skip to main content
10.1145/3214745.3214807acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessiggraphConference Proceedingsconference-collections
invited-talk

Perceptually validated analytical BRDFs parameters remapping

Published:12 August 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

The need to manually match the appearance of a material in two or more different rendering tools is common in digital 3D product design, due to the wide range of tools and material models commonly used, and a lack of standards to exchange materials data. Since the effect of BRDF parameters on rendered images is non-uniform, visually matching to a reference is time consuming and error-prone. We present an automatic BRDF remapping technique to match the appearance of a source material model to a target, providing a mapping between their parameter spaces. Our framework, based on Genetic Algorithm optimization and an image space similarity metric, provides a faithful mapping among analytical BRDFs, even when the BRDF models are deeply different. Objective and perceptual evaluations confirm the efficacy of the framework.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

17-382-guarnera.mp4

References

  1. Roland W. Fleming. 2014. Visual perception of materials and their properties. Vision Research 94 (2014), 62 -- 75.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. D. Guarnera, G.C. Guarnera, A. Ghosh, C. Denk, and M. Glencross. 2016. BRDF Representation and Acquisition. Computer Graphics Forum 35, 2 (2016), 625--650.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. M Kleiner, D Brainard, and D Pelli. 2007. What's new in Psychtoolbox-3? Perception 36, 1. Issue 14.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Addy Ngan, Frédo Durand, and Wojciech Matusik. 2006. Image-driven Navigation of Analytical BRDF Models. In Proceedings of the 17th Eurographics Conference on Rendering Techniques (EGSR '06). Eurographics Association, 399--407. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Alejandro Sztrajman, Jaroslav Krivanek, Alexander Wilkie, and Tim Weyrich. 2017. Image-based Remapping of Material Appearance. In Proc. 5th Workshop on Material Appearance Modeling (MAM '17), Reinhard Klein and Holly Rushmeier (Eds.). The Eurographics Association, Aire-la-Ville, Switzerland, Switzerland.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Matteo Toscani, Matteo Valsecchi, and Karl R. Gegenfurtner. 2017. Lightness perception for matte and glossy complex shapes. Vision Research 131 (2017), 82 -- 95.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. B. Walter, S. R Marschner, H. Li, and K. E Torrance. 2007. Microfacet models for refraction through rough surfaces. In Proceedings of the 18th Eurographics conference on Rendering Techniques. Eurographics Association, 195--206. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Perceptually validated analytical BRDFs parameters remapping

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          SIGGRAPH '18: ACM SIGGRAPH 2018 Talks
          August 2018
          158 pages
          ISBN:9781450358200
          DOI:10.1145/3214745

          Copyright © 2018 Owner/Author

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 12 August 2018

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • invited-talk

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate1,822of8,601submissions,21%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader