| Tuesday, August 12 2008 |
Part of a recent press-event held in New York, AMD showcased a new technology that makes rendering photo-realistic humans possible. It made game developers stand up and take note.
This technology called Cinema 2.0 makes producing photo-realistic human characters possible. It can be used in scenarios such as producing a full-on CGI movie or parts of it, where computers generate the actors' computer-animated replica that's the most photo-realistic in today's time. For example, the woman in the picture below is computer-animated. Believe it!
It works on this principle:
A model is sent into a large spherical room, walls of which have hundreds of high-definition cameras that capture the model's facial 3D contour, the data is analysed, this is used to generate real-time video renders of the person's facial expressions by the system as the face and all its features are redrawn in several facial expressions. The false-colour image you see below maps reflection and the interaction of light with the surface. A true colour image captures the model's colour features at various parts of the face. The data will be used to draw computer-rendered characters.
The big names in the gaming industry, namely Splash Damage, Crytek, Rebellion, Remedy (makers of Alan Wake Forever) and even Blizzard were noted in the presentation as partners of AMD. This technology looks close to being the way of the future, tomorrow's games will be more cinematic than ever thanks to ongoing efforts by the major players in the hardware industry also working on technologies that will drive them.
Source: Joystiq
This technology called Cinema 2.0 makes producing photo-realistic human characters possible. It can be used in scenarios such as producing a full-on CGI movie or parts of it, where computers generate the actors' computer-animated replica that's the most photo-realistic in today's time. For example, the woman in the picture below is computer-animated. Believe it!
It works on this principle:
A model is sent into a large spherical room, walls of which have hundreds of high-definition cameras that capture the model's facial 3D contour, the data is analysed, this is used to generate real-time video renders of the person's facial expressions by the system as the face and all its features are redrawn in several facial expressions. The false-colour image you see below maps reflection and the interaction of light with the surface. A true colour image captures the model's colour features at various parts of the face. The data will be used to draw computer-rendered characters.
The big names in the gaming industry, namely Splash Damage, Crytek, Rebellion, Remedy (makers of Alan Wake Forever) and even Blizzard were noted in the presentation as partners of AMD. This technology looks close to being the way of the future, tomorrow's games will be more cinematic than ever thanks to ongoing efforts by the major players in the hardware industry also working on technologies that will drive them.
Source: Joystiq
User comments
Show us the real image (a photograph with natural light).
Why? I think this is why they presented this image, to show a CGI inserted in a real-life image, to show the potential.
P.S. I am not working for them (I wish...) so how can I show you the "real" image? What is not real in that image?
P.S. I am not working for them (I wish...) so how can I show you the "real" image? What is not real in that image?
You THINK. But that's not true until you come up with the exact original image (or links to a site that has it)
The other guy also thinks... Why he is right and I am not? Anyways, i don't want a debate on this matter... Just think, for example, at Transformers - the movie...
The other guy meant it still looks like a video-game, less photo-realistic (because that robot killed it) and not a photo that's morphed into a graphic. I don't want "other guy" as your source, a photo of the exact picture in real world with natural lighting or a link to such a picture.
I have to say that initially I agreed with VIPER until I looked closer at the image. It really is an excellent CGI of New York. Look at the street. NY streets are much more bumpy at the edges with all the "repairs" etc. They are also missing the street names that are on every street corner on NY. The aircons on the building on the LHS are perfectly formed and alike. The windows are all "matte reflections" without internal content. The building on the RHS, first street corner, has identical windows on the top 2 floors. There are no attachment points for the fire escape on the LHS. Depth of field (focus) too wide. Car in front 100% sharp, as is building in distance. Also incorrect modelling of vanishing point (perspective) on second building LHS. Look at the roof and each floor, they are all sloping downwards. Reason for the error? Very simple mistake often made with shadows too. (Ever seen non-parallel shadows that converge! LOL). The reason is that they are modelling the vanishing point in "2D" and "on the page" rather than as an infinity point off the page.
Excellent CGI. But missing a few details on inspection. However, completely unobservable details in movie action shot.
Excellent CGI. But missing a few details on inspection. However, completely unobservable details in movie action shot.
This is NOT a 3D depth map. It is a light map (for reflections). Plain and simple.
You're right. I'll make the edit. But the principle is the same, just this image doesn't refer to it....
...but doesn't reflection form function of ray-tracing? Refection maps are something shaders use. (?)
...but doesn't reflection form function of ray-tracing? Refection maps are something shaders use. (?)
Alan Wake Forever
Come on, that's just mean! Give Remedy a little credit, it will come.
Come on, that's just mean! Give Remedy a little credit, it will come.
by: tatuka666Just some strikethrough humour :) Remember Mr. Duke Nukem?
Alan Wake Forever
Come on, that's just mean! Give Remedy a little credit, it will come.
Remedy is better known for Max Paynes so IMO referring to that would be better than Alan Wake :)
I know. I want Alan Wake. Fast. Amazing how in MP2 using just SM 1.4 they could create visuals on par/ better than some SM 2.0 titles.
by: robspierre6but you need nvidia gtx 980 or gtx 960 or ati 9870 or 9850 to can run games like this
This is how games should look like.
by: VIPERits not real look at the brciks on the building they have a CG look to them they are glossy and take a look at the cars...
U r kidding, right? The only thing in this image that is NOT for real is exactly the robot that was superimposed to a real image...
also take notice to how its the same 3 cars just with colors changed. the F150's/G6's appear to use the photorealism tech done with the HD cams but the taxicab isn't a real vehicle and is repeated up the road...
by: cdawall
also take notice to how its the same 3 cars just with colors changed. the F150's/G6's appear to use the photorealism tech done with the HD cams but the taxicab isn't a real vehicle and is repeated up the road...
You underestimate the popularity of the Ford F150 and the Pontiac G6. :laugh:
And I don't know about you, but just because I walk down a city street and see lots of the same kinds of card, I don't go, "Yep, this reality is obviously photoshopped -- I can tell, just look at this line here..." :p
by: mdm-adphlook up the street and you can see the same maroon F150 in the same spot to the left o the the yellow taxi cab
You underestimate the popularity of the Ford F150 and the Pontiac G6. :laugh:
And I don't know about you, but just because I walk down a city street and see lots of the same kinds of card, I don't go, "Yep, this reality is obviously photoshopped -- I can tell, just look at this line here..." :p
and be honest the buildings look fake they are glossy?
Ray-tracing has a good future, but Cinema 2.0's future is clean as a whistle as long as they skip some shaders. This is what I hate about shaders, they look good however they don't scale well with the background and they use up too many resources, which is why Crysis is taking longer to resolve than expected. Right now, in those photos, the shaders are only being put on props and characters, such as the cars, windows, and Ruby if you look more closely in the gallery at the website. Textures have an excelling role at the background and in some cases the robot, which are cleverly disguised with motion blur and anistropics. As for the lighting, that glare from the robot's "eye" could be good ol' transparent 2D entities. With these rather clever methods, Cinema 2.0 should show up in dev's in no time once this DX10 crap ends for good. In the meantime, I'm keeping close watch on too many promises from companies.
by: lemonadesodanot only all of that, but the lines on the street blur as they go back rather quickly actully, signs of 4x AF there. Also the details in the building behind it are lacking the depth and quality of the foreground.
I have to say that initially I agreed with VIPER until I looked closer at the image. It really is an excellent CGI of New York. Look at the street. NY streets are much more bumpy at the edges with all the "repairs" etc. They are also missing the street names that are on every street corner on NY. The aircons on the building on the LHS are perfectly formed and alike. The windows are all "matte reflections" without internal content. The building on the RHS, first street corner, has identical windows on the top 2 floors. There are no attachment points for the fire escape on the LHS. Depth of field (focus) too wide. Car in front 100% sharp, as is building in distance. Also incorrect modelling of vanishing point (perspective) on second building LHS. Look at the roof and each floor, they are all sloping downwards. Reason for the error? Very simple mistake often made with shadows too. (Ever seen non-parallel shadows that converge! LOL). The reason is that they are modelling the vanishing point in "2D" and "on the page" rather than as an infinity point off the page.
Excellent CGI. But missing a few details on inspection. However, completely unobservable details in movie action shot.
Great! Now back on topic please and no name calling.:rolleyes:
This is nothing new, it's just being promoted to the world by AMD/ATI now :). Just look at the research of Paul Debevec (one of the creators of LightStage) at his page. You may recognize few of the projects - ATI made a real-time tech demo for 9800 series out of one. And another for x1000 cards.
Also visit these pages related to Cinema 2.0 now:
http://gl.ict.usc.edu/Research/FaceScanning/
http://gl.ict.usc.edu/Research/LS5/
Check these videos out and you will see the same girl from the pictures AMD posted:
LS5_Siggraph_052005.avi
LS5_ET_HD_H264.mov
Also visit these pages related to Cinema 2.0 now:
http://gl.ict.usc.edu/Research/FaceScanning/
http://gl.ict.usc.edu/Research/LS5/
Check these videos out and you will see the same girl from the pictures AMD posted:
LS5_Siggraph_052005.avi
LS5_ET_HD_H264.mov
It may not be uber awesome, but I mean, dayum, its awesome nonetheless. Very Impressive AMD/ATI.
Please, let our comments go to AMD Cinema 2.0 and all that's in the news. News comments for the win.
by: candle_86I just can't help but think of this:
not only all of that, but the lines on the street blur as they go back rather quickly actully, signs of 4x AF there. Also the details in the building behind it are lacking the depth and quality of the foreground.
[Source]
Seriously, stop the hating on AMD -- this technology looks amazing, just admit it. It's okay to say that about the "other team" once in a while -- I personally like AMD chips better, but I admit Intel's research into high-k technology is cool as hell, and eagerly await 32nm chips. See how it works? :p
I don't admint that it isn't cool, I simply state that its not perfect, I wasn't around here when the human head showed up, but honestly I didn't like it either. Photo Realism to me, means photo realism, and this nor Nvidia are quite there. Its almost photo realistic but has a long way to go
by: mdm-adphThat's funny!
I just can't help but think of this:
[Source]
Seriously, stop the hating on AMD -- this technology looks amazing, just admit it. It's okay to say that about the "other team" once in a while -- I personally like AMD chips better, but I admit Intel's research into high-k technology is cool as hell, and eagerly await 32nm chips. See how it works? :p
:rockout: