1 university college london 2 university of southern california, institute for creative technologies...

48
1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating Fabricating Microgeometry for Microgeometry for Custom Surface Custom Surface Reflectance Reflectance Tim Weyrich 1 Pieter Peers 2 Wojciech Matusik 3 Szymon Rusinkiewicz 3,4 SIGGRAPH 2009 SIGGRAPH 2009 August 4, New Orleans August 4, New Orleans

Upload: ian-corbett

Post on 28-Mar-2015

214 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

1 University College London2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies3 Adobe Systems, Inc.4 Princeton University

1 University College London2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies3 Adobe Systems, Inc.4 Princeton University

Fabricating Microgeometry Fabricating Microgeometry for Custom Surface for Custom Surface

ReflectanceReflectance

Fabricating Microgeometry Fabricating Microgeometry for Custom Surface for Custom Surface

ReflectanceReflectance

Tim Weyrich1 Pieter Peers2

Wojciech Matusik3 Szymon Rusinkiewicz3,4

Tim Weyrich1 Pieter Peers2

Wojciech Matusik3 Szymon Rusinkiewicz3,4

SIGGRAPH 2009SIGGRAPH 2009August 4, New OrleansAugust 4, New Orleans

Page 2: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Acquiring & Fabricating GeometryAcquiring & Fabricating Geometry3D

Sca

nnin

g 3D

Printin

g

Wikimedia Common

Page 3: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Acquiring & Fabricating Reflectance?Acquiring & Fabricating Reflectance?

Refl

ecta

nce

Acq

uisi

tion

???

Page 4: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Microfacet TheoryMicrofacet Theory

‣ Reflectance as a result of microgeometry– Surface modelled by tiny mirrors (microfacets)

[Torrance and Sparrow 1967]

‣ Reflectance as a result of microgeometry– Surface modelled by tiny mirrors (microfacets)

[Torrance and Sparrow 1967]

n

lv

hn

Page 5: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Microfacet TheoryMicrofacet Theory

1-D Microfacet Distribution

1-D Microfacet Distribution AppearanceAppearance

Page 6: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Microfacet TheoryMicrofacet Theory

[Ngan e

t al. 2

00

5]

[Ngan e

t al. 2

00

5]

Page 7: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Microfacet TheoryMicrofacet Theory

Page 8: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Previous WorkPrevious Work

[Ashikhmin et al. 2000][Ashikhmin et al. 2000]

Page 9: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Previous WorkPrevious Work

‣ Material design and editing– Aggregate BRDF from arbitrary microgeometry

[Westin et a. 1992; Ashikhmin et al. 2000]

– BRDF design by drawing highlights [Colbert et al. 2006]

‣ Material design and editing– Aggregate BRDF from arbitrary microgeometry

[Westin et a. 1992; Ashikhmin et al. 2000]

– BRDF design by drawing highlights [Colbert et al. 2006]

[Colbert et al. 2006][Colbert et al. 2006]

Page 10: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Previous WorkPrevious Work

‣ Material design and editing– Aggregate BRDF from arbitrary microgeometry

[Westin et a. 1992; Ashikhmin et al. 2000]

– BRDF design by drawing highlights [Colbert et al. 2006]

– But no microgeometry from highlights

‣ Material design and editing– Aggregate BRDF from arbitrary microgeometry

[Westin et a. 1992; Ashikhmin et al. 2000]

– BRDF design by drawing highlights [Colbert et al. 2006]

– But no microgeometry from highlights

Page 11: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Previous WorkPrevious Work

‣ Material design and editing– Aggregate BRDF from arbitrary microgeometry

[Westin et a. 1992; Ashikhmin et al. 2000]

– BRDF design by drawing highlights [Colbert et al. 2006]

– But no microgeometry from highlights

‣ Reflector design– Search for mirror geometry with target radiation

[Patow and Pueyo 2005; Patow et al. 2007]

– But fixed light source position and not planar

‣ Material design and editing– Aggregate BRDF from arbitrary microgeometry

[Westin et a. 1992; Ashikhmin et al. 2000]

– BRDF design by drawing highlights [Colbert et al. 2006]

– But no microgeometry from highlights

‣ Reflector design– Search for mirror geometry with target radiation

[Patow and Pueyo 2005; Patow et al. 2007]

– But fixed light source position and not planar

[Pato

w a

nd P

ueyo. 2

005]

[Pato

w a

nd P

ueyo. 2

005]

Page 12: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Previous WorkPrevious Work

‣ Physical appearance output– 3-D printing of artistic geometry

[Séquin 2000]

– Bas-relief sculpture outputsmacroscopic appearance[Cignoni et al. 1997; Weyrich etal. 2007; Song et al. 2007; Kerberet al. 2007]

– But no user-defined reflectanceoutput

‣ Physical appearance output– 3-D printing of artistic geometry

[Séquin 2000]

– Bas-relief sculpture outputsmacroscopic appearance[Cignoni et al. 1997; Weyrich etal. 2007; Song et al. 2007; Kerberet al. 2007]

– But no user-defined reflectanceoutput

[Séq

uin

2005

][S

éq

uin

2005

]

[Weyrich

et a

l. 2007]

[Weyrich

et a

l. 2007]

Page 13: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Problem DefinitionProblem Definition

‣ BRDF specification by microfacet distribution (MFD)

‣ Find microgeometry that– has normals that satisfy MFD

– is a height field

– is tileable (for efficiency)

‣ In a sense, MFD integration problem

‣ Related to Poisson problem– except that gradient locations not known

‣ BRDF specification by microfacet distribution (MFD)

‣ Find microgeometry that– has normals that satisfy MFD

– is a height field

– is tileable (for efficiency)

‣ In a sense, MFD integration problem

‣ Related to Poisson problem– except that gradient locations not known

Page 14: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

ApproachApproach

Desired Highlight Shape (MFG)

Desired Highlight Shape (MFG)

Sampled MF OrientationsSampled MF Orientations

Continuous Height FieldContinuous Height Field

Milled SurfaceMilled Surface

Low-Discrepancy

Sampling

Low-Discrepancy

Sampling

Simulated Annealing / Poisson

Equation

Simulated Annealing / Poisson

Equation

Computer-Controlled Milling

Computer-Controlled Milling

Page 15: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Reflectance SpecificationReflectance Specification

‣ Target BRDF assumptions– Spatially homogeneous

– Purely specular (describable by MFD)

‣ Hemispherical MFD– Defined by highlight under

frontal illumination

– 2-D representation in parabolicmapping

‣ Target BRDF assumptions– Spatially homogeneous

– Purely specular (describable by MFD)

‣ Hemispherical MFD– Defined by highlight under

frontal illumination

– 2-D representation in parabolicmapping

Page 16: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Reflectance of Base MaterialReflectance of Base Material

‣ Substrate exhibits its own, base BRDF

‣ Altered reflectance by shaped microgeometry

‣ Net BRDF is convolution of MFD by base BRDF

‣ Goal: Shaping base material to exhibit aggregate target BRDF

‣ Substrate exhibits its own, base BRDF

‣ Altered reflectance by shaped microgeometry

‣ Net BRDF is convolution of MFD by base BRDF

‣ Goal: Shaping base material to exhibit aggregate target BRDF

Page 17: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Accounting For Base BRDFAccounting For Base BRDF

Target MFDTarget MFD Deconvolved by base MFDDeconvolved by base MFD

Base MFDBase MFD

Page 18: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Sampling the MFDSampling the MFD

‣ Microfacets cannot control “brightness” of a reflection

‣ “Stippling” instead: drawing discrete facets from MFD

‣ Microfacets cannot control “brightness” of a reflection

‣ “Stippling” instead: drawing discrete facets from MFD

Page 19: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Sampling the MFDSampling the MFD

‣ Low-discrepancy sampling required

‣ We use centroidal Voronoi tesselation [Secord 2002]

‣ Low-discrepancy sampling required

‣ We use centroidal Voronoi tesselation [Secord 2002]

Target MFDTarget MFD Random SamplingRandom Sampling Low-discrepancy Sampling

Low-discrepancy Sampling

Page 20: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Result of MF SamplingResult of MF Sampling

Page 21: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Height Field OptimizationHeight Field Optimization

‣ Maximize continuity and integrability

‣ Two-stage procedure1.Arrangement

2.Vertical displacement

‣ Maximize continuity and integrability

‣ Two-stage procedure1.Arrangement

2.Vertical displacement

Page 22: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Arrangement OptimizationArrangement Optimization

‣ Shuffling facets to optimize:– Compatibility of neighboring slopes

– Mean-free rows and columns

– Minimize “valleys” in end result(physical process causes horizontal flats at concavities)

‣ Shuffling facets to optimize:– Compatibility of neighboring slopes

– Mean-free rows and columns

– Minimize “valleys” in end result(physical process causes horizontal flats at concavities) ShufflingShuffling

Page 23: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Arrangement OptimizationArrangement Optimization

‣ Shuffle using simulated annealing optimization– Global penalty function

– Pair-wise facet swaps

– Logarithmic annealing schedule

‣ Shuffle using simulated annealing optimization– Global penalty function

– Pair-wise facet swaps

– Logarithmic annealing scheduleShufflingShuffling

Page 24: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Displacement OptimizationDisplacement Optimization

‣ Vertical displacement to minimize discontinuities

‣ Maps to Poisson problem– Facets determine local gradients

– Cyclic connectivity for tileability

‣ Vertical displacement to minimize discontinuities

‣ Maps to Poisson problem– Facets determine local gradients

– Cyclic connectivity for tileabilityVertical Displacement

Vertical Displacement

Page 25: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Effect of Valley OptimizationEffect of Valley Optimization

‣ Halves horizontal areas

‣ Preserves continuity

‣ Halves horizontal areas

‣ Preserves continuity

Unoptimized: 918 Concave EdgesUnoptimized: 918 Concave Edges 418 Concave Edges418 Concave Edges

Page 26: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Fabricating MicrogeometryFabricating Microgeometry

‣ Requires shaping glossy materials

‣ Many processes exist– Milling

– Etching

– Cutting

– Minting

– ...

‣ Requires shaping glossy materials

‣ Many processes exist– Milling

– Etching

– Cutting

– Minting

– ...

Page 27: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Our Prototype ProcessOur Prototype Process

‣ Prototype fabrication– Base material: aluminum

– Computer-controlled mill

‣ Practical challenges– Drill bit tip has finite extent

– Milling creates grooves

– Milling speed

‣ Prototype fabrication– Base material: aluminum

– Computer-controlled mill

‣ Practical challenges– Drill bit tip has finite extent

– Milling creates grooves

– Milling speed

Page 28: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Our Prototype ProcessOur Prototype Process

‣ Process Details– Milling at 0.001-inch resolution

– Milling x- and y-scanlines

‣ Sample size– 30×30-height field

– ca. 1mm2 facets

– Overall milling time: 5.5 hours

‣ Process Details– Milling at 0.001-inch resolution

– Milling x- and y-scanlines

‣ Sample size– 30×30-height field

– ca. 1mm2 facets

– Overall milling time: 5.5 hours

Page 29: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Highlight ObservationHighlight Observation

Light DirectionLight Direction ObserverObserver

Page 30: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

ObserverObserver

Highlight ObservationHighlight Observation

Light DirectionLight Direction

Page 31: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

EvaluationEvaluation

‣ Imaging reflectance lobe

‣ Experimental setup:

‣ Imaging reflectance lobe

‣ Experimental setup:

Page 32: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

ResultsResults

Page 33: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

ResultsResults

Page 34: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

ResultsResults

Page 35: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

ResultsResults

Page 36: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

ResultsResults

Page 37: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

ResultsResults

Page 38: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

ObserverObserver

Curved SurfacesCurved Surfaces

Light DirectionLight Direction

Page 39: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Curved SurfacesCurved Surfaces

(Simulation)(Simulation)

Page 40: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

ConstraintsConstraints

‣ Only integrable MFDs– Barycenter along surface normal

– “What goes up has to go down”

‣ Purely specular reflectance

‣ Shadowing term implicit

‣ Only integrable MFDs– Barycenter along surface normal

– “What goes up has to go down”

‣ Purely specular reflectance

‣ Shadowing term implicit

Page 41: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Practical ScenariosPractical Scenarios

‣ Various application scenarios exist– Architectural decorations

‣ Various application scenarios exist– Architectural decorations

Courte

sy b

y ch

arlie

nin

@ P

an

orm

aio

Courte

sy b

y ch

arlie

nin

@ P

an

orm

aio

Page 42: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Practical ScenariosPractical Scenarios

‣ Various application scenarios exist– Architectural decorations

– Material design (not selection)

‣ Various application scenarios exist– Architectural decorations

– Material design (not selection)

Courte

sy b

y V

icky S

haw

Courte

sy b

y V

icky S

haw

Page 43: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Practical ScenariosPractical Scenarios

‣ Various application scenarios exist– Architectural decorations

– Material design (not selection)

– Lighting control (interior design)

‣ Various application scenarios exist– Architectural decorations

– Material design (not selection)

– Lighting control (interior design) With

perm

ission ⓒ

Stu

dio

Make

Lig

ht

With

perm

ission ⓒ

Stu

dio

Make

Lig

ht

Page 44: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Practical ScenariosPractical Scenarios

‣ Various application scenarios exist– Architectural decorations

– Material design (not selection)

– Lighting control (interior design)

– Camouflage (“stealth” materials)

‣ Various application scenarios exist– Architectural decorations

– Material design (not selection)

– Lighting control (interior design)

– Camouflage (“stealth” materials)

Wikim

edia

Com

mons

Wikim

edia

Com

mons

Page 45: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Practical ScenariosPractical Scenarios

‣ Various application scenarios exist– Architectural decorations

– Material design (not selection)

– Lighting control (interior design)

– Camouflage (“stealth” materials)

– Security markers

‣ Various application scenarios exist– Architectural decorations

– Material design (not selection)

– Lighting control (interior design)

– Camouflage (“stealth” materials)

– Security markers

Courte

sy b

y K

en

t Quirk

Courte

sy b

y K

en

t Quirk

Page 46: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Practical ScenariosPractical Scenarios

‣ Various application scenarios exist– Architectural decorations

– Material design (not selection)

– Lighting control (interior design)

– Camouflage (“stealth” materials)

– Security markers

– Logos, product design, etc.

‣ Various application scenarios exist– Architectural decorations

– Material design (not selection)

– Lighting control (interior design)

– Camouflage (“stealth” materials)

– Security markers

– Logos, product design, etc.

Page 47: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

Practical ScenariosPractical Scenarios

‣ Various application scenarios exist– Architectural decorations

– Material design (not selection)

– Lighting control (interior design)

– Camouflage (“stealth” materials)

– Security markers

– Logos, product design, etc.

‣ Manufacturing methods are application-dependent

‣ Microgeometry computation remains general

‣ Various application scenarios exist– Architectural decorations

– Material design (not selection)

– Lighting control (interior design)

– Camouflage (“stealth” materials)

– Security markers

– Logos, product design, etc.

‣ Manufacturing methods are application-dependent

‣ Microgeometry computation remains general

Page 48: 1 University College London 2 University of Southern California, Institute for Creative Technologies 3 Adobe Systems, Inc. 4 Princeton University Fabricating

AcknowledgmentsAcknowledgments

The content of the information does not necessarily reflect the position or the policy of the US Government, and no official endorsement should be

inferred.

The content of the information does not necessarily reflect the position or the policy of the US Government, and no official endorsement should be

inferred.