“ZoeMatrope: a system for physical material design”
Conference:
Type:
Title:
- ZoeMatrope: a system for physical material design
Session/Category Title: MATERIALS
Presenter(s)/Author(s):
Moderator(s):
Abstract:
Reality is the most realistic representation. We introduce a material display called ZoeMatrope that can reproduce a variety of materials with high resolution, dynamic range and light field reproducibility by using compositing and animation principles used in a zoetrope and a thaumatrope. With ZoeMatrope, the quality of the material is equivalent to that of real objects and the range of expressible materials is diversified by overlaying a set of base materials in a linear combination. ZoeMatrope is also able to express spatially-varying materials, and even augmented materials such as materials with an alpha channel. In this paper, we propose a method for selecting the optimal material set and determining the weights of the linear combination to reproduce a wide range of target materials properly. We also demonstrate the effectiveness of this approach with the developed system and show the results for various materials.
References:
1. Blackwell, H. R. 1946. Contrast thresholds of the human eye. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 36, 11, 624–643.Google ScholarCross Ref
2. Glasner, D., Zickler, T., and Levin, A. 2014. A reflectance display. ACM Trans. Graph. 33, 4, 61:1–61:12. Google ScholarDigital Library
3. Hašan, M., Fuchs, M., Matusik, W., Pfister, H., and Rusinkiewicz, S. 2010. Physical reproduction of materials with specified subsurface scattering. ACM Trans. Graph. 29, 3, 61:1–61:10. Google ScholarDigital Library
4. Hecht, S., and Smith, E. L. 1936. Intermittent stimulation by light vi. area and the relation between critical frequency and intensity. J. Gen. Physiol. 19, 6, 979–989.Google ScholarCross Ref
5. Hullin, M. B., Lensch, H. P. A., Raskar, R., Seidel, H.-P., and Ihrke, I. 2011. Dynamic display of BRDFs. Computer Graphics Forum 30, 2, 475–483.Google ScholarCross Ref
6. Hullin, M. B., Ihrke, I., Heidrich, W., Weyrich, T., Damberg, G., and Fuchs, M. 2013. Computational fabrication and display of material appearance. Eurographics State-of-the-Art Reports (STAR), 137–153.Google Scholar
7. Jones, A., McDowall, I., Yamada, H., Bolas, M., and Debevec, P. 2007. Rendering for an interactive 360° light field display. ACM Trans. Graph. 26, 3, 40:1–40:10. Google ScholarDigital Library
8. Jones, A., Nagano, K., Liu, J., Busch, J., Yu, X., and Bolas, M. 2014. Interpolating vertical parallax for an autostereoscopic three-dimensional projector array. J. Electron. Imaging 23, 1, 011005-1-011005:12.Google ScholarCross Ref
9. Kautz, J., and McCool, M. D. 2000. Approximation of glossy reflection with prefiltered environment maps. In Proceedings of the Graphics Interface, (GI ’00), 119–126.Google Scholar
10. Matusik, W., Ajdin, B., Gu, J., Lawrence, J., Lensch, H. P. A., Pellacini, F., and Rusinkiewicz, S. 2009. Printing spatially-varying reflectance. ACM Trans. Graph. 28, 5, 128:1–128:9. Google ScholarDigital Library
11. Nayar, S. K., Belhumeur, P. N., and Boult, T. E. 2004. Lighting sensitive display. ACM Trans. Graph. 23, 4, 963–979. Google ScholarDigital Library
12. Ochiai, Y., and Takai, H. 2011. The cyclone display: Rotation, reflection, flicker and recognition combined to the pixels. In Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, Emerging Technologies, (SIGGRAPH ’11), 16:1–16:1. Google ScholarDigital Library
13. Ochiai, Y., Oyama, A., and Toyoshima, K. 2012. A colloidal display: Membrane screen that combines transparency, BRDF and 3D volume. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, Emerging Technologies, (SIGGRAPH ’12), 2:1–2:1. Google ScholarDigital Library
14. Raskar, R., Welch, G., Low, K.-L., and Bandyopadhyay, D. 2001. Shader lamps: Animating real objects with image-based illumination. In Proceedings of the 12th Eurographics Workshop on Rendering Techniques, 89–102. Google ScholarDigital Library
15. Ren, P., Wang, J., Snyder, J., Tong, X., and Guo, B. 2011. Pocket reflectometry. ACM Trans. Graph. 30, 4, 45:1–45:10. Google ScholarDigital Library
16. Smoot, L., Bassett, K., Hart, S., Burman, D., and Rom-rell, A. 2010. An interactive zoetrope for the animation of solid figurines and holographic projections. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, Emerging Technologies, (SIGGRAPH ’10), 6:1–6:1. Google ScholarDigital Library
17. Theocharous, S., Theocharous, E., and Lehman, J. 2012. The evaluation of the performance of two pyroelectric detectors with vertically aligned multi-walled carbon nanotube coatings. Infrared Physics and Technology 55, 4, 299–305.Google ScholarCross Ref
18. Walter, B., Marschner, S. R., Li, H., and Torrance, K. E. 2007. Microfacet models for refraction through rough surfaces. In Proceedings of the 18th Eurographics Conference on Rendering Techniques, (EGSR’07), 195–206. Google ScholarDigital Library
19. Watanabe, Y., Narita, G., Tatsuno, S., Yuasa, T., Sum-ino, K., and Ishikawa, M. 2015. High-speed 8-bit image projector at 1,000 fps with 3 ms delay. In Proceedings of the International Display Workshops, (IDW ’15), 1064–1065.Google Scholar
20. Weyrich, T., Peers, P., Matusik, W., and Rusinkiewicz, S. 2009. Fabricating microgeometry for custom surface reflectance. ACM Trans. Graph. 28, 3, 32:1–32:6. Google ScholarDigital Library
