Controlled-Distortion Constrained Global Parametrization

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Multi-chart Geometry Images Pedro Sander Harvard Harvard Hugues Hoppe Microsoft Research Hugues Hoppe Microsoft Research Steven Gortler Harvard Harvard.
Advertisements

Feature-Aligned T-Meshes
Image Registration  Mapping of Evolution. Registration Goals Assume the correspondences are known Find such f() and g() such that the images are best.
Parameterizing a Geometry using the COMSOL Moving Mesh Feature
Developable Surface Fitting to Point Clouds Martin Peternell Computer Aided Geometric Design 21(2004) Reporter: Xingwang Zhang June 19, 2005.
Differential geometry I
R. DOSIL, X. M. PARDO, A. MOSQUERA, D. CABELLO Grupo de Visión Artificial Departamento de Electrónica e Computación Universidade de Santiago de Compostela.
SGP 2008 A Local/Global Approach to Mesh Parameterization Ligang Liu Lei Zhang Yin Xu Zhejiang University, China Craig Gotsman Technion, Israel Steven.
Mesh Parameterization: Theory and Practice Differential Geometry Primer.
Siggraph Course Mesh Parameterization: Theory and Practice
3D Surface Parameterization Olga Sorkine, May 2005.
Xianfeng Gu, Yaling Wang, Tony Chan, Paul Thompson, Shing-Tung Yau
Inter-Surface Mapping John Schreiner, Arul Asirvatham, Emil Praun (University of Utah) Hugues Hoppe (Microsoft Research)
Section 4: Implementation of Finite Element Analysis – Other Elements
Active Contour Models (Snakes) 건국대학교 전산수학과 김 창 호.
MAT 3730 Complex Variables Section 4.1 Contours
Lapped Textures Emil Praun and Adam Finkelstien (Princeton University) Huges Hoppe (Microsoft Research) SIGGRAPH 2000 Presented by Anteneh.
Research Report FWF S9206 Helmut Pottmann Geometric Modeling & Industrial Geometry.
New Techniques for Visualisation of Large and Complex Networks with Directed Edges Tim Dwyer 1 Yehuda Koren 2 1 Monash University, Victoria, Australia.
Spherical Parameterization and Remeshing Emil Praun, University of Utah Hugues Hoppe, Microsoft Research.
Bounded-distortion Piecewise Mesh Parameterization
CS CS 175 – Week 7 Parameterization Linear Methods.
1 Dr. Scott Schaefer Surface Parameterization. Parameterization and Texturing 2/30.
CS CS 175 – Week 7 Parameterization Boundary, Non-Linear, and Global Methods.
Non-Euclidean Embedding
1 Numerical geometry of non-rigid shapes Non-Euclidean Embedding Non-Euclidean Embedding Lecture 6 © Alexander & Michael Bronstein tosca.cs.technion.ac.il/book.
Smooth Geometry Images Frank Losasso, Hugues Hoppe, Scott Schaefer, Joe Warren.
All-Hex Meshing using Singularity-Restricted Field Yufei Li 1, Yang Liu 2, Weiwei Xu 2, Wenping Wang 1, Baining Guo 2 1. The University of Hong Kong 2.
Projective Texture Atlas for 3D Photography Jonas Sossai Júnior Luiz Velho IMPA.
Intrinsic Parameterization for Surface Meshes Mathieu Desbrun, Mark Meyer, Pierre Alliez CS598MJG Presented by Wei-Wen Feng 2004/10/5.
CSE554Laplacian DeformationSlide 1 CSE 554 Lecture 8: Laplacian Deformation Fall 2012.
06 - Boundary Models Overview Edge Tracking Active Contours Conclusion.
October 14, 2014Computer Vision Lecture 11: Image Segmentation I 1Contours How should we represent contours? A good contour representation should meet.
Shape Matching for Model Alignment 3D Scan Matching and Registration, Part I ICCV 2005 Short Course Michael Kazhdan Johns Hopkins University.
Chapter 4 Creating Placed Features
Optical Flow Donald Tanguay June 12, Outline Description of optical flow General techniques Specific methods –Horn and Schunck (regularization)
11 July 2002 Reverse Engineering 1 Dr. Gábor Renner Geometric Modelling Laboratory, Computer and Automation Research Institute.
Scalable and Fully Distributed Localization With Mere Connectivity.
Global Parametrization of Range Image Sets Nico Pietroni, Marco Tarini, Olga Sorkine, Denis Zorin.
Minimal area surfaces in hyperbolic space
Course 13 Curves and Surfaces. Course 13 Curves and Surface Surface Representation Representation Interpolation Approximation Surface Segmentation.
Computer Graphics Some slides courtesy of Pierre Alliez and Craig Gotsman Texture mapping and parameterization.
INFORMATIK Laplacian Surface Editing Olga Sorkine Daniel Cohen-Or Yaron Lipman Tel Aviv University Marc Alexa TU Darmstadt Christian Rössl Hans-Peter Seidel.
Computer Animation Rick Parent Computer Animation Algorithms and Techniques Optimization & Constraints Add mention of global techiques Add mention of calculus.
Andrew Nealen / Olga Sorkine / Mark Alexa / Daniel Cohen-Or SoHyeon Jeong 2007/03/02.
Extraction and remeshing of ellipsoidal representations from mesh data Patricio Simari Karan Singh.
Mesh Coarsening zhenyu shu Mesh Coarsening Large meshes are commonly used in numerous application area Modern range scanning devices are used.
Simple Quad Domains for Field Aligned Mesh Parametrization Marco Tarini Enrico Puppo Daniele Panozzo Nico Pietroni Paolo Cignoni Visual Computing Lab ISTI-CNR,
CSE 185 Introduction to Computer Vision Feature Matching.
1 Methods in Image Analysis – Lecture 3 Fourier CMU Robotics Institute U. Pitt Bioengineering 2630 Spring Term, 2004 George Stetten, M.D., Ph.D.
Auto-calibration we have just calibrated using a calibration object –another calibration object is the Tsai grid of Figure 7.1 on HZ182, which can be used.
Construction of Navau and Garcia. Basic steps Construction has two parameters: smoothness k and n > k, defining how closely the surface follows the control.
Energy-minimizing Curve Design Gang Xu Zhejiang University Ouyang Building, 20-December-2006.
Smooth constraints for Spline Variational Modeling Julien Lenoir (1), Laurent Grisoni (1), Philippe Meseure (1,2), Yannick Rémion (3), Christophe Chaillou.
Reverse Engineering of Point Clouds to Obtain Trimmed NURBS Lavanya Sita Tekumalla Advisor: Prof. Elaine Cohen School of Computing University of Utah Masters.
Photoconsistency constraint C2 q C1 p l = 2 l = 3 Depth labels If this 3D point is visible in both cameras, pixels p and q should have similar intensities.
SIGGRAPH 2007 Hui Fang and John C. Hart.  We propose an image editing system ◦ Preserve its detail and orientation by resynthesizing texture from the.
How are shapes deformed in computer graphics? In order to deform a shape, a planar map is used. A map is a vector function that changes the coordinates.
Bi-3 C2 Polar Subdivision
Practical 3D Frame Field Generation
QUAD MESHING, CROSS FIELDS, AND THE GINZBURG-LANDAU THEORY
You can check broken videos in this slide here :
CSE 554 Lecture 9: Laplacian Deformation
Uncalibrated Geometry & Stratification
GIS Lecture: Projections
Mesh Parameterization: Theory and Practice
Which of the equations below is an equation of a cone?
Y. Lipman D. Levin D. Cohen-Or
Y. Lipman D. Levin D. Cohen-Or
Single View Modeling of Free-Form Scenes
Presentation transcript:

Controlled-Distortion Constrained Global Parametrization Ashish Myles Denis Zorin New York University

Global parametrization Map surface to plane Quadrangulation, remeshing Geometry images Smooth surface fitting Texture/bump/displacement mapping

Goal: singularity placement singularities (valence ≠ 4)

Seamless global parametrization Requirements Feature alignment Map feature curves to axis-aligned curves Seamlessness All curvatures multiples of π/2 Seam-constraints cone singularities (quad valence 3) Integrated curvature (angle deficit) π/2 0 curvature (flat) Feature line grid-aligned Parametrize Quadrangulate π/2

Cones for features and distortion Cones required to align to features Distortion induced by feature-alignment – π/2 π/2 π/2

Distortion vs # cones Proposition 5. For a closed smooth surface with bounded total curvature, and any ϵ > 0, there is a seamless parametrization which has total metric distortion EARAP < ϵ.

Goal: automatic cone placement Constraints: (1) seamless (2) feature-aligned Automatically determine cone locations + curvatures (mixed integer problem) Trade off parametric distortion with number of cones. No cones High distortion Bad 2 cones Low distortion Good

Contribution: Unification of techniques Cross-field smoothing Conformal maps scale by eϕ Easy feature alignment No direct distortion control Easy to measure distortion Over-constrained for multiple features ϕ2 ∗ω = dϕ + ∗h cross-field rotation closest conformal map

Smooth cross-field not distortion-aware

Smooth cross-field not distortion-aware 23 cones 31 cones parametric domain collapsed region To avoid collapse

Conformal maps: over-constrained Seamless + feature-alignment constraints Internal curvature –∇2ϕ = Knew – Korig Feature line curvature ∇nϕ = κnew – κorig Relative alignment constraints Conformal maps cannot handle condition 3. But cross-fields can. Completely determine ϕ Surface already satisfies 1 and 2. – π/2 π/2 0 boundary curvature π/2 π/2 boundary curvature

Relation of conformal to cross-fields Conformal map scale by eϕ rotate by eiθ Simple 2D case ∇θ⊥ = ∇ϕ (∇θ computes field rotation) 3D surfaces (exterior calculus) ∗ω = dϕ (Connection form ω ∼ ∇θ) [Crane et al. 2010]

Conformal + Cross-field ∗ω = dϕ + ∗h cross-field rotation closest conformal map harmonic part Interpretation of harmonic part: Not seamless! Distortion ||ϕ||2 only accurate if ||h||2 low Need to minimize ||h||2 Constant scale across

(cross-field smoothness) System setup and solve Compute ∗ω = dϕ + ∗h (determines cross-field) Minimize energy ||ϕ||2 + α ||ω||2 Satisfy linear constraints for seamlessness and alignment Minimize ||h||2 (gives linear equations) Mixed Integer problem Integer variables (curvature, relative-alignment) Solve via iterative rounding (similar to [Bommes 2009]) (distortion) (cross-field smoothness) Quadratic energy Linear constraints

32 cones no harmonic minimization Field smoothing [Bommes 2009] 0.0 0.6 α = 0.001 90 cones α = 0.01 66 cones α = 0.1 47 cones α = 1.0 44 cones α = 100 32 cones no harmonic minimization Field smoothing [Bommes 2009] 32 cones

Comparison to cross-field smoothing 50 cones 0.0 0.6 Field smoothing [Bommes 2009] 72 cones Ours

Comparison to cross-field smoothing [Bommes 2009] 0.0 0.6 Ours

Comparison to cross-field smoothing 0.0 0.6

Comparison to cross-field smoothing 23 cones 0.0 0.6 Field smoothing [Bommes 2009] 31 cones Ours To avoid collapse

Comparison to cross-field smoothing 0.0 0.8 Field smoothing [Bommes 2009] 30 cones Ours 42 cones

Summary Unification via ∗ω = dϕ + ∗h of 1) cross-field smoothing and 2) conformal approach Support both 1) feature alignment and 2) distortion control Trade-off between 1) distortion and 2) # cones

Questions?