• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD Showcases Cinema 2.0, Photo-realism Closer to Developers' Reach

tkpenalty said:
18e.jpg


If it wasnt for that robot out of nowhere, that would have been pretty close to being truely photorealistic.
Click to expand...

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...
 
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?
 
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.
 
18b_thm.jpg

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. (?)
 
Alan Wake Forever

Come on, that's just mean! Give Remedy a little credit, it will come.
 
tatuka666 said:
Alan Wake Forever

Come on, that's just mean! Give Remedy a little credit, it will come.
Click to expand...

Just some strikethrough humour :) Remember Mr. Duke Nukem?
 
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.
 
VIPER said:
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...
Click to expand...

its 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...

18e.jpg



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...
 
cdawall said:
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...
Click to expand...
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
 
mdm-adph said:
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
Click to expand...

look up the street and you can see the same maroon F150 in the same spot to the left o the the yellow taxi cab

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.
 
Last edited:
lemonadesoda said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Great! Now back on topic please and no name calling.:rolleyes:
 
Old News

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
 
It may not be uber awesome, but I mean, dayum, its awesome nonetheless. Very Impressive AMD/ATI.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Please, let our comments go to AMD Cinema 2.0 and all that's in the news. News comments for the win.
 
candle_86 said:
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.
Click to expand...

I just can't help but think of this:

photoshops.png

[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
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top