COLOR

  • FXGuide – ACES 2.0 with ILM’s Alex Fry

    https://draftdocs.acescentral.com/background/whats-new/

    ACES 2.0 is the second major release of the components that make up the ACES system. The most significant change is a new suite of rendering transforms whose design was informed by collected feedback and requests from users of ACES 1. The changes aim to improve the appearance of perceived artifacts and to complete previously unfinished components of the system, resulting in a more complete, robust, and consistent product.

    Highlights of the key changes in ACES 2.0 are as follows:

    • New output transforms, including:
      • A less aggressive tone scale
      • More intuitive controls to create custom outputs to non-standard displays
      • Robust gamut mapping to improve perceptual uniformity
      • Improved performance of the inverse transforms
    • Enhanced AMF specification
    • An updated specification for ACES Transform IDs
    • OpenEXR compression recommendations
    • Enhanced tools for generating Input Transforms and recommended procedures for characterizing prosumer cameras
    • Look Transform Library
    • Expanded documentation

    Rendering Transform

    The most substantial change in ACES 2.0 is a complete redesign of the rendering transform.

    ACES 2.0 was built as a unified system, rather than through piecemeal additions. Different deliverable outputs “match” better and making outputs to display setups other than the provided presets is intended to be user-driven. The rendering transforms are less likely to produce undesirable artifacts “out of the box”, which means less time can be spent fixing problematic images and more time making pictures look the way you want.

    Key design goals

    • Improve consistency of tone scale and provide an easy to use parameter to allow for outputs between preset dynamic ranges
    • Minimize hue skews across exposure range in a region of same hue
    • Unify for structural consistency across transform type
    • Easy to use parameters to create outputs other than the presets
    • Robust gamut mapping to improve harsh clipping artifacts
    • Fill extents of output code value cube (where appropriate and expected)
    • Invertible – not necessarily reversible, but Output > ACES > Output round-trip should be possible
    • Accomplish all of the above while maintaining an acceptable “out-of-the box” rendering

    ,
    Read more: FXGuide – ACES 2.0 with ILM’s Alex Fry
  • 3D Lighting Tutorial by Amaan Kram

    http://www.amaanakram.com/lightingT/part1.htm

    The goals of lighting in 3D computer graphics are more or less the same as those of real world lighting.

     

    Lighting serves a basic function of bringing out, or pushing back the shapes of objects visible from the camera’s view.
    It gives a two-dimensional image on the monitor an illusion of the third dimension-depth.

    But it does not just stop there. It gives an image its personality, its character. A scene lit in different ways can give a feeling of happiness, of sorrow, of fear etc., and it can do so in dramatic or subtle ways. Along with personality and character, lighting fills a scene with emotion that is directly transmitted to the viewer.

     

    Trying to simulate a real environment in an artificial one can be a daunting task. But even if you make your 3D rendering look absolutely photo-realistic, it doesn’t guarantee that the image carries enough emotion to elicit a “wow” from the people viewing it.

     

    Making 3D renderings photo-realistic can be hard. Putting deep emotions in them can be even harder. However, if you plan out your lighting strategy for the mood and emotion that you want your rendering to express, you make the process easier for yourself.

     

    Each light source can be broken down in to 4 distinct components and analyzed accordingly.

    · Intensity
    · Direction
    · Color
    · Size

     

    The overall thrust of this writing is to produce photo-realistic images by applying good lighting techniques.

    , ,
    Read more: 3D Lighting Tutorial by Amaan Kram
  • Weta Digital – Manuka Raytracer and Gazebo GPU renderers – pipeline

    https://jo.dreggn.org/home/2018_manuka.pdf

     

    http://www.fxguide.com/featured/manuka-weta-digitals-new-renderer/

     

    The Manuka rendering architecture has been designed in the spirit of the classic reyes rendering architecture. In its core, reyes is based on stochastic rasterisation of micropolygons, facilitating depth of field, motion blur, high geometric complexity,and programmable shading.

     

    This is commonly achieved with Monte Carlo path tracing, using a paradigm often called shade-on-hit, in which the renderer alternates tracing rays with running shaders on the various ray hits. The shaders take the role of generating the inputs of the local material structure which is then used bypath sampling logic to evaluate contributions and to inform what further rays to cast through the scene.

     

    Over the years, however, the expectations have risen substantially when it comes to image quality. Computing pictures which are indistinguishable from real footage requires accurate simulation of light transport, which is most often performed using some variant of Monte Carlo path tracing. Unfortunately this paradigm requires random memory accesses to the whole scene and does not lend itself well to a rasterisation approach at all.

     

    Manuka is both a uni-directional and bidirectional path tracer and encompasses multiple importance sampling (MIS). Interestingly, and importantly for production character skin work, it is the first major production renderer to incorporate spectral MIS in the form of a new ‘Hero Spectral Sampling’ technique, which was recently published at Eurographics Symposium on Rendering 2014.

     

    Manuka propose a shade-before-hit paradigm in-stead and minimise I/O strain (and some memory costs) on the system, leveraging locality of reference by running pattern generation shaders before we execute light transport simulation by path sampling, “compressing” any bvh structure as needed, and as such also limiting duplication of source data.
    The difference with reyes is that instead of baking colors into the geometry like in Reyes, manuka bakes surface closures. This means that light transport is still calculated with path tracing, but all texture lookups etc. are done up-front and baked into the geometry.

     

    The main drawback with this method is that geometry has to be tessellated to its highest, stable topology before shading can be evaluated properly. As such, the high cost to first pixel. Even a basic 4 vertices square becomes a much more complex model with this approach.

     

     

    Manuka use the RenderMan Shading Language (rsl) for programmable shading [Pixar Animation Studios 2015], but we do not invoke rsl shaders when intersecting a ray with a surface (often called shade-on-hit). Instead, we pre-tessellate and pre-shade all the input geometry in the front end of the renderer.
    This way, we can efficiently order shading computations to sup-port near-optimal texture locality, vectorisation, and parallelism. This system avoids repeated evaluation of shaders at the same surface point, and presents a minimal amount of memory to be accessed during light transport time. An added benefit is that the acceleration structure for ray tracing (abounding volume hierarchy, bvh) is built once on the final tessellated geometry, which allows us to ray trace more efficiently than multi-level bvhs and avoids costly caching of on-demand tessellated micropolygons and the associated scheduling issues.

     

    For the shading reasons above, in terms of AOVs, the studio approach is to succeed at combining complex shading with ray paths in the render rather than pass a multi-pass render to compositing.

     

    For the Spectral Rendering component. The light transport stage is fully spectral, using a continuously sampled wavelength which is traced with each path and used to apply the spectral camera sensitivity of the sensor. This allows for faithfully support any degree of observer metamerism as the camera footage they are intended to match as well as complex materials which require wavelength dependent phenomena such as diffraction, dispersion, interference, iridescence, or chromatic extinction and Rayleigh scattering in participating media.

     

    As opposed to the original reyes paper, we use bilinear interpolation of these bsdf inputs later when evaluating bsdfs per pathv ertex during light transport4. This improves temporal stability of geometry which moves very slowly with respect to the pixel raster

     

    In terms of the pipeline, everything rendered at Weta was already completely interwoven with their deep data pipeline. Manuka very much was written with deep data in mind. Here, Manuka not so much extends the deep capabilities, rather it fully matches the already extremely complex and powerful setup Weta Digital already enjoy with RenderMan. For example, an ape in a scene can be selected, its ID is available and a NUKE artist can then paint in 3D say a hand and part of the way up the neutral posed ape.

     

    We called our system Manuka, as a respectful nod to reyes: we had heard a story froma former ILM employee about how reyes got its name from how fond the early Pixar people were of their lunches at Point Reyes, and decided to name our system after our surrounding natural environment, too. Manuka is a kind of tea tree very common in New Zealand which has very many very small leaves, in analogy to micropolygons ina tree structure for ray tracing. It also happens to be the case that Weta Digital’s main site is on Manuka Street.

     

     

    , ,
    Read more: Weta Digital – Manuka Raytracer and Gazebo GPU renderers – pipeline
  • OLED vs QLED – What TV is better?

     

    Supported by LG, Philips, Panasonic and Sony sell the OLED system TVs.
    OLED stands for “organic light emitting diode.”
    It is a fundamentally different technology from LCD, the major type of TV today.
    OLED is “emissive,” meaning the pixels emit their own light.

     

    Samsung is branding its best TVs with a new acronym: “QLED”
    QLED (according to Samsung) stands for “quantum dot LED TV.”
    It is a variation of the common LED LCD, adding a quantum dot film to the LCD “sandwich.”
    QLED, like LCD, is, in its current form, “transmissive” and relies on an LED backlight.

     

    OLED is the only technology capable of absolute blacks and extremely bright whites on a per-pixel basis. LCD definitely can’t do that, and even the vaunted, beloved, dearly departed plasma couldn’t do absolute blacks.

    QLED, as an improvement over OLED, significantly improves the picture quality. QLED can produce an even wider range of colors than OLED, which says something about this new tech. QLED is also known to produce up to 40% higher luminance efficiency than OLED technology. Further, many tests conclude that QLED is far more efficient in terms of power consumption than its predecessor, OLED.

     

    (more…)
    ,
    Read more: OLED vs QLED – What TV is better?
  • Scientists claim to have discovered ‘new colour’ no one has seen before: Olo

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clyq0n3em41o

    By stimulating specific cells in the retina, the participants claim to have witnessed a blue-green colour that scientists have called “olo”, but some experts have said the existence of a new colour is “open to argument”.

    The findings, published in the journal Science Advances on Friday, have been described by the study’s co-author, Prof Ren Ng from the University of California, as “remarkable”.

    (A) System inputs. (i) Retina map of 103 cone cells preclassified by spectral type (7). (ii) Target visual percept (here, a video of a child, see movie S1 at 1:04). (iii) Infrared cellular-scale imaging of the retina with 60-frames-per-second rolling shutter. Fixational eye movement is visible over the three frames shown.

    (B) System outputs. (iv) Real-time per-cone target activation levels to reproduce the target percept, computed by: extracting eye motion from the input video relative to the retina map; identifying the spectral type of every cone in the field of view; computing the per-cone activation the target percept would have produced. (v) Intensities of visible-wavelength 488-nm laser microdoses at each cone required to achieve its target activation level.

    (C) Infrared imaging and visible-wavelength stimulation are physically accomplished in a raster scan across the retinal region using AOSLO. By modulating the visible-wavelength beam’s intensity, the laser microdoses shown in (v) are delivered. Drawing adapted with permission [Harmening and Sincich (54)].

    (D) Examples of target percepts with corresponding cone activations and laser microdoses, ranging from colored squares to complex imagery. Teal-striped regions represent the color “olo” of stimulating only M cones.

    Read more: Scientists claim to have discovered ‘new colour’ no one has seen before: Olo
  • What Is The Resolution and view coverage Of The human Eye. And what distance is TV at best?

    https://www.discovery.com/science/mexapixels-in-human-eye

    About 576 megapixels for the entire field of view.

     

    Consider a view in front of you that is 90 degrees by 90 degrees, like looking through an open window at a scene. The number of pixels would be:
    90 degrees * 60 arc-minutes/degree * 1/0.3 * 90 * 60 * 1/0.3 = 324,000,000 pixels (324 megapixels).

     

    At any one moment, you actually do not perceive that many pixels, but your eye moves around the scene to see all the detail you want. But the human eye really sees a larger field of view, close to 180 degrees. Let’s be conservative and use 120 degrees for the field of view. Then we would see:

    120 * 120 * 60 * 60 / (0.3 * 0.3) = 576 megapixels.

    Or.

    7 megapixels for the 2 degree focus arc… + 1 megapixel for the rest.

    https://clarkvision.com/articles/eye-resolution.html

     

    Details in the post

    (more…)

    , ,
    Read more: What Is The Resolution and view coverage Of The human Eye. And what distance is TV at best?

LIGHTING