![[Abridged] Integer Coordinates for Intrinsic Geometry Processing](/img/o.gif)
Пікірлер
@gcostello2075 21 күн бұрын
I feel silly asking this, but I have been interested in rendering as a hobby for a few years now and have built very basic small and simple renders with simple shading. I have started reading about physically based rendering and my question is, what is the name of this field of study? How can I approach this from a more academic standpoint rather than a hobbyist? Thanks for the videos!
@oraz. 27 күн бұрын
Maybe this will show up everywhere
@SampleroftheMultiverse 27 күн бұрын
That’s 9:18 deep
@MikeLeed Ай бұрын
You sound like Sean Carroll
@debblez Ай бұрын
incredible
@dot32 Ай бұрын
So awesome that you're both the genius behind this who invented this technique, and a brilliant presenter!
@fibbooo1123 Ай бұрын
Ah, the classic "go up a dimension and things work out better". Beautiful work!
@sentinelav Ай бұрын
What an awesome paper!! Brilliantly presented, and it's great to see it applied to previous methods. Can this render Mandelbulbs and other fractals?
@dot32 Ай бұрын
I believe fractals can already be raytraced, i've seen it done by youtubers such as CodeParade with marble marcher and Sebastian Lague with his Ray Marching video.
@MDNQ-ud1ty Ай бұрын
I'm starting a band and I need an 3 octave oscillator that runs about 0.5hz, interested?
@makerhq376 Ай бұрын
A very high quality report on worthwhile research. Thank you for posting this online!!
@MooImABunny Ай бұрын
damn that's really interesting, I wish I had the time to study this more, but I don't have much of a background in the world of ray tracing
@MagicGonads Ай бұрын
any challenges of this in higher dimensions?
@markgillespie4572 Ай бұрын
Everything works out pretty much the same in higher dimensions, the only difference is that the formula for determining your safe step size gets more complicated. In 2D, the safe step size is the solution to a linear equation. In 3D, the safe step size is the solution to a quadratic equation, so you have to take some square roots. In 4D, the safe step size is the solution to a cubic equation, so the formula is nastier. And in n dimensions, the safe step size is the solution to a degree n-1 equation, which can get tricky to solve if your dimension is too high
@sergehog Ай бұрын
PLEASE UPDATE VIDEO DESCRIPTION: you have same URL for different ShaderToy examples!!
@markgillespie4572 Ай бұрын
Thanks for the heads up, I've fixed the links
@larswanderart Ай бұрын
very cool! what happens if you have a negative singularity within the ball's radius? how do you pick a constant to ensure your harmonic function is positive?
@markgillespie4572 Ай бұрын
Good question! When using our algorithm, you always have to set the ball radius small enough so that it does not contain any singularities (because Harnack's inequality only applies to harmonic functions without singularities in the ball). This also means that we can always pick a constant to make the harmonic function positive. We talk a little more about the details in section 4.3 of the paper, since the harmonic function that we use for surface reconstruction contains negative singularities
@mzg147 Ай бұрын
amazing and beautiful stuff, thanks for the video!
@minma02262 Ай бұрын
Amazing work!
@suricrasia Ай бұрын
this is awesome work, well done!
@copywright5635 Ай бұрын
Woahhhhh! This looks really good! Never thought of using shadertoy for these sorts of math expository vids but I definitely will now!
@Sloimay Ай бұрын
This video is so good! I'm not a big math guy so I barely understood what was being shown but the "You don't need to know how it works, just need to know it does *this*" sections were very helpful. It's abstraction we rarely see in nerd KZbin that greatly help my viewing experience so these were really nice. + The set up of motivations was really well written I think, the script in general is really clean and straight to the point while keeping it interesting the entire way through. And the actual tech being displayed is so elegant and cool!
@MDNQ-ud1ty Ай бұрын
So it's so good but you have no real knowledge about the subject to actually judge if it was good? You should study some basic logic first.
@drdca8263 Ай бұрын
@@MDNQ-ud1tyI believe the point being made was that it was good at being as understandable as it could be even to people not familiar with the field. While I can imagine a situation in which someone who doesn’t know the background of some field could, after watching a video, incorrectly reach the conclusion that the video was good at that, with the inaccurate judgement being a consequence of not being familiar with the field, I really don’t think not-having-familiarity-with-the-field in general makes one totally unable to evaluate how well some video does at the task. So, I don’t think your criticism of the original comment makes the most sense.
@Kavukamari Ай бұрын
wait if it can trace the implicit surface of a 3d shape, then it should also be a general solution to rasterization of fonts, should it not?
@GU-jt5fe Ай бұрын
Good idea, I hope this gets a response.
@santiagorestricciones1973 3 ай бұрын
La buena
@3DPrintcomvideos Жыл бұрын
This is fantastic. Really wonderful explanation.