使用3个位置和法线进行光线追踪来插值三角形曲面的最佳方法

Question

I am working on conventional Whitted ray tracing, and trying to interpolate surface of hitted triangle as if it was convex instead of flat. The idea is to treat triangle as a parametric surface s(u,v) once the barycentric coordinates (u,v) of hit point p are known. This surface equation should be calculated using triangle's positions p0, p1, p2 and normals n0, n1, n2 . The hit point itself is calculated as

p = (1-u-v)*p0 + u*p1 + v*p2;

I have found three different solutions till now.

Solution 1. Projection

The first solution I came to. It is to project hit point on planes that come through each of vertexes p0, p1, p2 perpendicular to corresponding normals, and then interpolate the result.

vec3 r0 = p0 + dot( p0 - p, n0 ) * n0;
vec3 r1 = p1 + dot( p1 - p, n1 ) * n1;
vec3 r2 = p2 + dot( p2 - p, n2 ) * n2;
p = (1-u-v)*r0 + u*r1 + v*r2;

Solution 2. Curvature

Suggested in a paper of Takashi Nagata "Simple local interpolation of surfaces using normal vectors" and discussed in question "Local interpolation of surfaces using normal vectors", but it seems to be overcomplicated and not very fast for real-time ray tracing (unless you precompute all necessary coefficients). Triangle here is treated as a surface of the second order.

Solution 3. Bezier curves

This solution is inspired by Brett Hale's answer. It is about using some interpolation of the higher order, cubic Bezier curves in my case. Eg, for an edge p0p1 Bezier curve should look like

B(t) = (1-t)^3*p0 + 3(1-t)^2*t*(p0+n0*adj) + 3*(1-t)*t^2*(p1+n1*adj) + t^3*p1,

where adj is some adjustment parameter.

Computing Bezier curves for edges p0p1 and p0p2 and interpolating them gives the final code:

float u1 = 1 - u;
float v1 = 1 - v;
vec3 b1 = u1*u1*(3-2*u1)*p0 + u*u*(3-2*u)*p1 + 3*u*u1*(u1*n0 + u*n1)*adj;
vec3 b2 = v1*v1*(3-2*v1)*p0 + v*v*(3-2*v)*p2 + 3*v*v1*(v1*n0 + v*n2)*adj;
float w = abs(u-v) < 0.0001 ? 0.5 : ( 1 + (u-v)/(u+v) ) * 0.5;
p = (1-w)*b1 + w*b2;

Alternatively, one can interpolate between three edges:

float u1 = 1.0 - u;
float v1 = 1.0 - v;
float w = abs(u-v) < 0.0001 ? 0.5 : ( 1 + (u-v)/(u+v) ) * 0.5;
float w1 = 1.0 - w;
vec3 b1 = u1*u1*(3-2*u1)*p0 + u*u*(3-2*u)*p1 + 3*u*u1*( u1*n0 + u*n1 )*adj;
vec3 b2 = v1*v1*(3-2*v1)*p0 + v*v*(3-2*v)*p2 + 3*v*v1*( v1*n0 + v*n2 )*adj;
vec3 b0 = w1*w1*(3-2*w1)*p1 + w*w*(3-2*w)*p2 + 3*w*w1*( w1*n1 + w*n2 )*adj;
p = (1-u-v)*b0 + u*b1 + v*b2;

Maybe I messed something in code above, but this option does not seem to be very robust inside shader.

PS The intention is to get more correct origins for shadow rays when they are casted from low-poly models. Here you can find the resulted images from test scene. Big white numbers indicates number of solution (zero for original image).

PPS I still wonder if there is another efficient solution which can give better result.

Answer 1

Keeping triangles 'flat' has many benefits and simplifies several stages required during rendering. Approximating a higher order surface on the other hand introduces quite significant tracing overhead and requires adjustments to your BVH structure.

When the geometry is being treated as a collection of facets on the other hand, the shading information can still be interpolated to achieve smooth shading while still being very efficient to process.

There are adaptive tessellation techniques which approximate the limit surface ( OpenSubdiv is a great example). Pixar's Photorealistic RenderMan has a long history using subdivision surfaces. When they switched their rendering algorithm to path tracing, they've also introduced a pretessellation step for their subdivision surfaces. This stage is executed right before rendering begins and builds an adaptive triangulated approximation of the limit surface. This seems to be more efficient to trace and tends to use less resources, especially for the high-quality assets used in this industry.

So, to answer your question. I think the most efficient way to achieve what you're after is to use an adaptive subdivision scheme which spits out triangles instead of tracing against a higher order surface.

Answer 2

Dan Sunday describes an algorithm that calculates the barycentric coordinates on the triangle once the ray-plane intersection has been calculated. The point lies inside the triangle if:
(s >= 0) && (t >= 0) && (s + t <= 1)

You can then use, say, n(s, t) = nu * s + nv * t + nw * (1 - s - t) to interpolate a normal, as well as the point of intersection, though n(s, t) will not, in general, be normalized, even if (nu, nv, nw) are. You might find higher order interpolation necessary. PN-triangles were a similar hack for visual appeal rather than mathematical precision. For example, true rational quadratic Bezier triangles can describe conic sections.