skip to main content
10.1145/3388769.3407454acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessiggraphConference Proceedingsconference-collections
course

Physics-based differentiable rendering: from theory to implementation

Published:17 August 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Physics-based rendering algorithms generate photorealistic images by simulating the flow of light through a detailed mathematical representation of a virtual scene. In contrast, physics-based differentiable rendering algorithms focus on computing derivative of images exhibiting complex light transport effects (e.g., soft shadows, interreflection, and caustics) with respect to arbitrary scene parameters such as camera pose, object geometry (e.g., vertex positions) as well as spatially varying material properties expressed as 2D textures and 3D volumes. This new level of generality has made physics-based differentiable rendering a key ingredient for solving many challenging inverse-rendering problems, that is, the search of scene configurations optimizing user-specified objective functions, using gradient-based methods (as illustrated in the figure below). Further, these techniques can be incorporated into probabilistic inference and machine learning pipelines. For instance, differentiable renderers allow "rendering losses" to be computed with complex light transport effects captured. Additionally, they can be used as generative models that synthesize photorealistic images.

References

  1. M. Abadi, A. Agarwal, P. Barham, E. Brevdo, Z. Chen, C. Citro, G. S. Corrado, A. Davis, J. Dean, M. Devin, S. Ghemawat, I. Goodfellow, A. Harp, G. Irving, M. Isard, Y. Jia, R. Jozefowicz, L. Kaiser, M. Kudlur, J. Levenberg, D. Mané, R. Monga, S. Moore, D. Murray, C. Olah, M. Schuster, J. Shlens, B. Steiner, I. Sutskever, K. Talwar, P. Tucker, V. Vanhoucke, V. Vasudevan, F. Viégas, O. Vinyals, P. Warden, M. Wattenberg, M. Wicke, Y. Yu, and X. Zheng. 2015. TensorFlow: Large-Scale Machine Learning on Heterogeneous Systems.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. James Arvo. 1994. The Irradiance Jacobian for partially occluded polyhedral sources. In SIGGRAPH '94. 343--350.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Edwin Catmull. 1978. A Hidden-Surface Algorithm with Anti-Aliasing. Comput. Graph. (Proc. SIGGRAPH) 12, 3 (1978), 6--11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar. 1960. Radiative Transfer. Courier Corporation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Robert L. Cook, Thomas Porter, and Loren Carpenter. 1984. Distributed Ray Tracing. Comput. Graph. (Proc. SIGGRAPH) 18, 3 (1984), 137--145.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Franklin C Crow. 1977. The aliasing problem in computer-generated shaded images. Commun. ACM 20, 11 (1977), 799--805.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Tomáš Davidović, Thomas Engelhardt, Iliyan Georgiev, Philipp Slusallek, and Carsten Dachsbacher. 2012. 3D rasterization: a bridge between rasterization and ray casting. In Graphics Interface. 201--208.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Martin de La Gorce, David J Fleet, and Nikos Paragios. 2011. Model-based 3D hand pose estimation from monocular video. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 33, 9 (2011), 1793--1805.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Harley Flanders. 1973. Differentiation under the integral sign. The American Mathematical Monthly 80, 6 (1973), 615--627.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Ned Greene and Michael Kass. 1994. Error-bounded antialiased rendering of complex environments. In SIGGRAPH. 59--66.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Ned Greene, Michael Kass, and Gavin Miller. 1993. Hierarchical Z-buffer visibility. In SIGGRAPH. ACM, 231--238.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Andreas Griewank. 1992. Achieving logarithmic growth of temporal and spatial complexity in reverse automatic differentiation. 1, 1 (1992), 35--54.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Andreas Griewank and Shawn Reese. 1991. On the Calculation of Jacobian Matrices by the Markowitz Rule. In Automatic Differentiation of Algorithms: Theory, Implementation, and Application. SIAM, 126--135.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Andreas Griewank and Andrea Walther. 2008. Evaluating derivatives: principles and techniques of algorithmic differentiation. Vol. 105. SIAM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Warren Hunt, Michael Mara, and Alex Nankervis. 2018. Hierarchical Visibility for Virtual Reality. ACM Comput. Graph. Interact. Tech. (Proc. I3D) 1, 1 (2018), 1--18.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Wolfram Research, Inc. [n.d.]. Mathematica, Version 11.3. Champaign, IL, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Wenzel Jakob. 2019. Enoki: structured vectorization and differentiation on modern processor architectures. https://github.com/mitsuba-renderer/enoki.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Henrik Wann Jensen. 1995. Importance driven path tracing using the photon map. In Rendering Techniques (Proc. EGWR). Springer, 326--335.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. James T. Kajiya. 1986. The Rendering Equation. In SIGGRAPH '86. 143--150.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Hiroharu Kato, Yoshitaka Ushiku, and Tatsuya Harada. 2018. Neural 3D mesh renderer. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 3907--3916.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. L. Gary Leal. 2007. Advanced Transport Phenomena: fluid mechanics and convective transport processes. Vol. 7. Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Tzu-Mao Li. 2019. Differentiable visual computing. MIT PhD Dissertation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Tzu-Mao Li, Miika Aittala, Frédo Durand, and Jaakko Lehtinen. 2018. Differentiable Monte Carlo ray tracing through edge sampling. ACM Trans. Graph. 37, 6 (2018), 222:1--222:11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Shichen Liu, Tianye Li, Weikai Chen, and Hao Li. 2019. Soft Rasterizer: A Differentiable Renderer for Image-based 3D Reasoning. International Conference on Computer Vision (2019).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Matthew M Loper and Michael J Black. 2014. OpenDR: An approximate differentiable renderer. In European Conference on Computer Vision. Springer, 154--169.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Morgan McGuire. 2004. Observations on silhouette sizes. J. Graph. Tools 9, 1 (2004), 1--12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Morgan McGuire and Louis Bavoil. 2013. Weighted blended order-independent transparency. Journal of Computer Graphics Techniques 2, 4 (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Don P Mitchell and Arun N Netravali. 1988. Reconstruction filters in computer-graphics. Comput. Graph. (Proc. SIGGRAPH) 22, 4 (1988), 221--228.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Uwe Naumann. 2008. Optimal Jacobian accumulation is NP-complete. Mathematical Programming 112, 2 (2008), 427--441.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Merlin Nimier-David, Delio Vicini, Tizian Zeltner, and Wenzel Jakob. 2019. Mitsuba 2: A retargetable forward and inverse renderer. ACM Trans. Graph. (Proc. SIGGRAPH Asia) 38, 6 (2019), 1--17.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Matt Olson and Hao Zhang. 2006. Silhouette extraction in Hough space. Comput. Graph. Forum (Proc. Eurographics) 25, 3 (2006), 273--282.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Eric Paquette, Pierre Poulin, and George Drettakis. 1998. A Light Hierarchy for Fast Rendering of Scenes with Many Lights. Comput. Graph. Forum (Proc. Eurographics) (1998), 63--74.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Adam Paszke, Sam Gross, Soumith Chintala, Gregory Chanan, Edward Yang, Zachary DeVito, Zeming Lin, Alban Desmaison, Luca Antiga, and Adam Lerer. 2017. Automatic differentiation in PyTorch. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Thomas Porter and Tom Duff. 1984. Compositing digital images. (1984), 253--259.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Ravi Ramamoorthi, Dhruv Mahajan, and Peter Belhumeur. 2007. A First-order Analysis of Lighting, Shading, and Shadows. ACM Trans. Graph. 26, 1 (2007), 2:1--2:21.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Pedro V. Sander, Hugues Hoppe, John Snyder, and Steven J. Gortler. 2001. Discontinuity edge overdraw. In Symposium on Interactive 3D Graphics and Games. ACM, 167--174.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Michelle Mills Strout and Paul Hovland. 2006. Linearity analysis for automatic differentiation. In International Conference on Computational Science. Springer, 574--581.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Eric Veach. 1998. Robust Monte Carlo Methods for Light Transport Simulation. Ph.D. Dissertation. Stanford University. Advisor(s) Guibas, Leonidas J.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Dominique Villard and Michael B Monagan. 1999. ADrien: an implementation of automatic differentiation in Maple. In International Symposium on Symbolic and Algebraic Computation. 221--228.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Bruce Walter, Sebastian Fernandez, Adam Arbree, Kavita Bala, Michael Donikian, and Donald P. Greenberg. 2005. Lightcuts: A Scalable Approach to Illumination. ACM Trans. Graph. (Proc. SIGGRAPH) 24, 3 (2005), 1098--1107.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Cheng Zhang, Bailey Miller, Kai Yan, Ioannis Gkioulekas, and Shuang Zhao. 2020. Path-Space Differentiable Rendering. ACM Trans. Graph. (Proc. SIGGRAPH) 39, 6 (2020), 143:1--143:19.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Cheng Zhang, Lifan Wu, Changxi Zheng, Ioannis Gkioulekas, Ravi Ramamoorthi, and Shaung Zhao. 2019. A Differential Theory of Radiative Transfer. ACM Trans. Graph. 38, 6 (2019), 227:1--227:16.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  1. Physics-based differentiable rendering: from theory to implementation

    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
      SIGGRAPH '20: ACM SIGGRAPH 2020 Courses
      August 2020
      3010 pages
      ISBN:9781450379724
      DOI:10.1145/3388769

      Copyright © 2020 Owner/Author

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all 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 third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 17 August 2020

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • course

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate1,822of8,601submissions,21%

      Upcoming Conference

      SIGGRAPH '24

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader