“Sparse-as-possible SVBRDF acquisition”
Conference:
Type(s):
Title:
- Sparse-as-possible SVBRDF acquisition
Session/Category Title: Materials
Presenter(s)/Author(s):
Abstract:
We present a novel method for capturing real-world, spatially-varying surface reflectance from a small number of object views (k). Our key observation is that a specific target’s reflectance can be represented by a small number of custom basis materials (N) convexly blended by an even smaller number of non-zero weights at each point (n). Based on this sparse basis/sparser blend model, we develop an SVBRDF reconstruction algorithm that jointly solves for n, N, the basis BRDFs, and their spatial blend weights with an alternating iterative optimization, each step of which solves a linearly-constrained quadratic programming problem. We develop a numerical tool that lets us estimate the number of views required and analyze the effect of lighting and geometry on reconstruction quality. We validate our method with images rendered from synthetic BRDFs, and demonstrate convincing results on real objects of pre-scanned shape and lit by uncontrolled natural illumination, from very few or even a single input image.
References:
1. Aittala, M., Weyrich, T., and Lehtinen, J. 2013. Practical SVBRDF capture in the frequency domain. ACM Trans. Graph. 32, 4 (July), 110:1–110:12.
2. Aittala, M., Weyrich, T., and Lehtinen, J. 2015. Two-shot SVBRDF capture for stationary materials. ACM Trans. Graph. 34, 4 (July), 110:1–110:13.
3. Chen, G., Dong, Y., Peers, P., Zhang, J., and Tong, X. 2014. Reflectance scanning: Estimating shading frame and BRDF with generalized linear light sources. ACM Transactions on Graphics 33, 4 (August).
4. Cook, R. L., and Torrance, K. E. 1982. A Reflectance Model for Computer Graphics. ACM Trans. Graph. 1, 1, 7–24.
5. Debevec, P. 1998. Rendering synthetic objects into real scenes: Bridging traditional and image-based graphics with global illumination and high dynamic range photography. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, ACM, New York, NY, USA, SIGGRAPH ’98, 189–198.
6. Dong, Y., Wang, J., Tong, X., Snyder, J., Lan, Y., BenEzra, M., and Guo, B. 2010. Manifold bootstrapping for SVBRDF capture. ACM Trans. Graph. 29, 4 (July), 98:1–98:10.
7. Dong, Y., Chen, G., Peers, P., Zhang, J., and Tong, X. 2014. Appearance-from-motion: Recovering spatially varying surface reflectance under unknown lighting. ACM Trans. Graph. 33, 6 (Nov.), 193:1–193:12.
8. Gardner, A., Tchou, C., Hawkins, T., and Debevec, P. 2003. Linear light source reflectometry. ACM Trans. Graph. 22, 3 (July), 749–758.
9. Goldman, D., Curless, B., Hertzmann, A., and Seitz, S. 2010. Shape and spatially-varying brdfs from photometric stereo. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, IEEE Transactions on 32, 6 (June), 1060–1071.
10. Lawrence, J., Ben-Artzi, A., DeCoro, C., Matusik, W., Pfister, H., Ramamoorthi, R., and Rusinkiewicz, S. 2006. Inverse shade trees for non-parametric material representation and editing. ACM Trans. Graph. 25, 3 (July), 735–745.
11. Lensch, H. P. A., Kautz, J., Goesele, M., Heidrich, W., and Seidel, H.-P. 2003. Image-based reconstruction of spatial appearance and geometric detail. ACM Trans. Graph. 22, 2 (Apr.), 234–257.
12. Lombardi, S., and Nishino, K. 2012. Single image multimaterial estimation. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, CVPR ’12, 238–245.
13. Lowe, D. G. 1999. Object recognition from local scale-invariant features. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Vision-Volume 2 – Volume 2, IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, ICCV ’99, 1150–.
14. Matusik, W., Pfister, H., Brand, M., and McMillan, L. 2003. A data-driven reflectance model. ACM Transactions on Graphics 22, 3 (July), 759–769.
15. Mcallister, D. K. 2002. A Generalized Surface Appearance Representation for Computer Graphics. PhD thesis. AAI3061704.
16. Ngan, A., Durand, F., and Matusik, W. 2005. Experimental analysis of BRDF models. In Proceedings of the Eurographics Symposium on Rendering, Eurographics Association, 117–226.
17. Nielsen, J. B., Jensen, H. W., and Ramamoorthi, R. 2015. On optimal, minimal brdf sampling for reflectance acquisition. ACM Trans. Graph. 34, 6 (Oct.), 186:1–186:11.
18. Ren, P., Wang, J., Snyder, J., Tong, X., and Guo, B. 2011. Pocket reflectometry. ACM Trans. Graph. 30, 4 (July), 45:1–45:10.
19. Schlick, C. 1994. An inexpensive BRDF model for physically-based rendering. Computer Graphics Forum 13, 3, 233–246. Cross Ref
20. Wang, J., Zhao, S., Tong, X., Snyder, J., and Guo, B. 2008. Modeling anisotropic surface reflectance with example-based microfacet synthesis. ACM Trans. Graph. 27, 3 (Aug.), 41:1–41:9.
21. Zhang, Z. 2000. A flexible new technique for camera calibration. In IEEE PAMI, vol. 22, 1330–1334.
22. Zhou, K., Synder, J., Guo, B., and Shum, H.-Y. 2004. Iso-charts: Stretch-driven mesh parameterization using spectral analysis. In Proceedings of the 2004 Eurographics/ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on Geometry Processing, ACM, New York, NY, USA, SGP ’04, 45–54.
23. Zickler, T., Enrique, S., Ramamoorthi, R., and Belhumeur, P. 2005. Reflectance sharing: image-based rendering from a sparse set of images. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Eurographics conference on Rendering Techniques, Eurographics Association, Aire-la-Ville, Switzerland, Switzerland, EGSR’05, 253–264.
