skip to main content
10.1145/2994258.2994275acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmigConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

Improving blendshape performance for crowds with GPU and GPGPU techniques

Published:10 October 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

For real-time applications, blendshape animations are usually calculated on the CPU, which are slow to animate, and are therefore generally limited to only the closest level of detail for a small number of characters in a scene. In this paper, we present a GPU based blendshape animation technique. By storing the blendshape model (including animations) on the GPU, we are able to attain significant speed improvements over CPU-based animation. We also find that by using compute shaders to decouple rendering and animation we can improve performance when rendering a crowd animation. Further gains are also made possible by using a smaller subset of blendshape expressions, at the cost of expressiveness. However, the quality impact can be minimised by selecting this subset carefully. We discuss a number of potential metrics to automate this selection.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

References

  1. Aspert, N., Santa Cruz, D., and Ebrahimi, T. 2002. MESH: measuring errors between surfaces using the Hausdorff distance. In ICME (1), 705--708.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Deng, Z., and Noh, J. 2008. Computer facial animation: A survey. In Data-driven 3D facial animation. Springer, 1--28.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Dudash, B. 2007. Skinned instancing. Tech. rep., NVidia.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Ekman, P., and Friesen, W. V. 1978. Facial action coding system. Consulting Psychologists Press, Stanford University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Evans, C., Martinsson, L., and Herfort, S. 2014. Building an empire: asset production in Ryse. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2014 Courses, 18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Faceware, 2016. Faceware Technologies Inc. http://facewaretech.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Garland, M., and Heckbert, P. S. 1997. Surface simplification using quadric error metrics. In Proceedings of the 24th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, 209--216. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Harte, N., and Gillen, E. 2015. TCD-TIMIT: An audio-visual corpus of continuous speech. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia 17, 5, 603--615.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Lewis, J., and Anjyo, K.-i. 2010. Direct manipulation blend-shapes. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 4, 42--50. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Lewis, J. P., Anjyo, K., Rhee, T., Zhang, M., Pighin, F., and Deng, Z. 2014. Practice and Theory of Blendshape Facial Models. In Eurographics 2014 - State of the Art Reports.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Lorach, T. 2007. DirectX 10 Blend Shapes: Breaking the Limits. GPU Gems 3, Addison-Wesley Professional, ch. 3, 53--67.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. McDonnell, R., Larkin, M., Dobbyn, S., Collins, S., and O'Sullivan, C. 2008. Clone attack! perception of crowd variety. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 27, 3, 26. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Mohr, A., and Gleicher, M. 2003. Deformation sensitive decimation. Tech. rep., University of Wisconsin Graphics Group.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Pilgrim, S., Steed, A., and Aguado, A. 2007. Progressive skinning for character animation. Computer Animation and Virtual Worlds 18, 4--5, 473--481. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Segal, M., and Akeley, K. 2012. The OpenGL Graphics System: A Specification (Version 4.3 (Core Profile)). Tech. rep., Khronos Group.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Seo, J., Irving, G., Lewis, J. P., and Noh, J. 2011. Compression and Direct Manipulation of Complex Blendshape Models. In Proceedings of the 2011 SIGGRAPH Asia Conference, 164:1--164:10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Seol, Y., Seo, J., Kim, P. H., Lewis, J. P., and Noh, J. 2011. Artist friendly facial animation retargeting. In ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 162. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Seol, Y., Lewis, J., Seo, J., Choi, B., Anjyo, K., and Noh, J. 2012. Spacetime expression cloning for blendshapes. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 31, 2, 14. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Wang, Z., Bovik, A. C., Sheikh, H. R., and Simoncelli, E. P. 2004. Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. Image Processing, IEEE Transactions on 13, 4, 600--612. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Yee, H. 2004. Perceptual metric for production testing. Journal of Graphics Tools 9, 4, 33--40.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Improving blendshape performance for crowds with GPU and GPGPU techniques

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      MIG '16: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Motion in Games
      October 2016
      202 pages
      ISBN:9781450345927
      DOI:10.1145/2994258

      Copyright © 2016 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 10 October 2016

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • short-paper

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate-9of-9submissions,100%

      Upcoming Conference

      MIG '24

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader