View
20
Download
1
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Real-Time Rendering Paper Presentation Logarithmic Perspective Shadow Maps. Brandon Lloyd Naga Govindaraju Cory Quammen Steve Molnar Dinesh Manocha Slides refer to Brandon Lloyd’s Presented by Bo-Yin Yao 2010.3.11. Outlines. Introduction Related work - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
1
Real-Time Rendering Paper Presentation
Logarithmic Perspective Shadow Maps
Brandon LloydNaga Govindaraju
Cory QuammenSteve Molnar
Dinesh Manocha
Slides refer to Brandon Lloyd’s
Presented by Bo-Yin Yao
2010.3.11
2
Outlines
Introduction Related work Logarithmic perspective warping Error analysis Results Conclusion
3
Outlines
Introduction Related work Logarithmic perspective warping Error analysis Results Conclusion
4
Standard Shadow Map
aliasing undersampled
5
Perspective Warping
aliasing
6
Logarithmic perspective shadow maps (LogPSMs)
Warp the shadow map using a perspective transformation with an additional logarithmic warping
Reduce maximum error to levels that are nearly optimal for scene-independent algorithms
Similar performance to PSM with less error
Similar error to PSM with less texture resolution
7
Logarithmic Perspective Warping
8
Outlines
Introduction Related work Logarithmic perspective warping Error analysis Results Conclusion
9
Single shadow map warping
Perspective shadow maps (PSMs) [Stamminger and Drettakis 2002]
10
Single shadow map warping
Light-space perspective shadow maps (LiSPSMs) [Wimmer et al. 2004]
Trapezoidal shadow maps [Martin and Tan 2004]
11
Face partitioning
Perspective warped cube maps[Kozlov 2004]
12
z-partitioning
Cascaded shadow maps [Engel 2007] Parallel split shadow maps [Zhang et al. 2006]
Separating-plane shadow maps[Mikkelsen 2007]
z
13
Adaptive partitioning Adaptive shadow maps
[Fernando et al. 2001] Queried virtual shadow maps
[Geigl and Wimmer 2007] Fitted virtual shadow maps
[Geigl and Wimmer 2007] Resolution matched shadow maps
[Lefohn et al. 2007] Tiled shadow maps
[Arvo 2004] Multiple shadow frusta
[Forsyth 2006]
14
Irregular z-buffer
GPU implementations [Arvo 2006; Sintorn et al. 2008]
Hardware architecture[Johnson et al. 2005]
15
Sampling modified methods
Scene-independent Methods
Single SM warping Face partitioning z-partitioning
Benefit Lower, nearly constant cost
Drawback Higher error
Scene-dependent Adaptive Irregular
16
Sampling modified methods
Scene-dependent Methods
Adaptive Irregular
Benefit Lower error
Drawback Higher, variable cost
17
Filtering methods
Percentage closer filtering[Reeves et al. 1987]
Variance shadow maps[Donnely and Lauritzen 2006; Lauritzen and McCool 2008]
Convolution shadow maps[Annen et al. 2007]
Exponential shadow maps[Salvi 2008; Annen et al. 2008]
18
Outlines
Introduction Related work Logarithmic perspective warping Error analysis Results Conclusion
19
Perspective warping
PSM Tight fit to the view frustum Low error in x, but high error along y
LiSPSMs Relax the warping to reduce the error in y, but this
increases the error in xPSM LiSPSM
high
err
or
low error
mod
erat
e er
ror
moderate error
y
x
20
Logarithmic + perspective warping
Starts with perspective projection similar to PSMs
Then applies a logarithmic transformation to correct for the high error in y
21
Logarithmic + perspective warping
Perspectiveprojection
Logarithmictransform
high
err
or
low
err
or
y
x
22
Logarithmic + perspective warping
Causes planar primitives to become curved
→ need a specialized rasterization to render
23
Logarithmic rasterization
Brute-force rasterization Use a fragment program Slower than standard rasterization
disables optimizations z-culling double-speed z-only rendering
breaks linear depth compression schemes
24
Outlines
Introduction Related work Logarithmic perspective warping Error analysis Results Conclusion
25
Combinations of algorithms
single SMStandardPLogP
z-partitioningZPZP+PZP+LogP
P - Perspective warpingLogP - Logarithmic perspective warpingZP - z-partitioning FP - face partitioning
face-partitioning-FP+PFP+LogP
26
Quantifying aliasing error
light
27
Quantifying aliasing error
light
light imageplane
shadow map
eye imageplane
28
Quantifying aliasing error
Maximum error: over a light ray over the frustum over all light positions
light
29
Scene-independent maximum error
Standard FP+P ZP5+P FP+LogP
30
Near optimal, scene-independent warping
Minimizes maximum error over a face Too complicated for practical use Used as a baseline
31
Maximum error over all light positions
Param. End face Side face - s Side face - t Side face - combined
Uniform
Perspective
Log+Persp.
Near optimal
32
Error distribution along a face
0 0.5 10
5
10
15
20
v
e Mp;s
0 0.5 10
5
10
15
20
ve M
p;t
max
err
or in
s
max
err
or in
tnear near farfar
UniformLiSPSMPSMLogPSM
Uniform LiSPSM PSM LogPSM
33
Maximum error for varying light directions with z-partitioning
view direction
direction to light
34
Outlines
Introduction Related work Logarithmic perspective warping Error analysis Results Conclusion
35
Single shadow map LogPSM
LogPSMs have lower maximum error more uniform error
LiSPSM
LogPSMLiSPSM
LogPSM
>107.753.2511113.257.7510< >107.753.2511113.257.7510<
Error color mapping
36
Partitioning schemes
Standard FP+P ZP5+P FP+LogP
37
Point lights
38
Demo video
39
Outlines
Introduction Related work Logarithmic perspective warping Error analysis Results Conclusion
40
Benefits of LogPSMs
LogPSMs are close to optimal for scene-independent algorithms
LogPSMs achieve low error with few shadow maps
Can replace perspective warping in scene-independent directly single shadow map z-partitioning face partitioning
41
Limitations of LogPSMs
Not currently supported in hardware
Share problems as other warping algorithms: Do not handle aliasing error due to surface orientation Face partitioning needed for most benefit
Not as simple as z-partitioning Can exhibit shearing artifacts
42
Thanks For Your Participation!
Recommended