A Textural Rendering regarding rendering.
By Brian K. Drescher
An inspirational injection for future programmersWHAT'S IN A RENDERING?
The term "rendering" that is used in computer graphics to describe the calculation process required to produce CGI imagery is derived from the old fashioned illustrators terminology that actually describes the same process. Two dimensional drawn or painted "rendering" usually means to "fill in the lines" of a sketch to produce a reasonably three-dimensional effect. As in modern computer graphics, illustrational rendering is a time consuming process that is expected to deliver a satisfying realistic effect. Again the parallel is the same you may expect the image in question to be satisfying, but there is something that is never quite right. Herein lies the second meaning of "rendering"...an interpretation of a scene or impression. A very important term...interpretation. In the early days of computer graphics there was much discussion regarding the simulation of the way a solid or transparent object absorbs, reflects, and just generally diffuses light emanating from a directional source. An object in space is merely a complicated "interruption" of otherwise coherent light rays traveling through space. When one of these poor little photons strikes a surface in it's path it may directly smash into it and be absorbed, or be bounced off into another direction, or refractively "bent" through a thick slice of virtual glass. That may not only ruin your otherwise quiet photonic day, but it may cause you to think for a nanosecond into which direction you may be heading, thus slowing you down...that costs time. If you add up all the thought processes of your photon buddies, serious "rendering" time has been lost. Since we experience objects as interruptions of space requiring light, do we really need photons or "rays" to describe these interruptions?...no... we need only to describe the interruptions...not every ray or photon.INTERPRETING INTERRUPTIONS
Our favorite names in CGI rendering casually dropped at parties to impress dates and potential clients are: Phong, Goraud, and Blinn. The latter has probably contributed more to the "shading crowd" than he is actually accredited for (texture maps, bump maps, difference maps, etc.) and he has only recently been included in the "basic" rendering algorithms of most of our favourite CGI software packages. The former two are the "old guys" in CGI. Their manner of rendering images has been used before most of you could reach a keyboard. Although there are hundreds of other imaginative people that have been responsible for the software required to create the images we see today, these three names provided the "backbone" for the render engines in almost every major CGI software package on the market today. Isn't strange that raytracing doesn't have the same "name brands" that the shader guys do? Could it be because the new generation is simply riding on the coattails of the old generation, or is it because no one wants to be responsible for their name to be attached to an "old technology"...rays and photons. Even radiosity falls back to into the old technology to extract it's images.ANOTHER INTERRUPTION INTERPRETATION
There is another way to approach the interruption of an object in space that doesn't include the obvious rays, beams, photons, etc. And that is to use the basis model of all of these light elements, frequencies and wavelengths. In this type of rendering and modeling (modeling can be done using current modelers, or frequency modelers...more later) the virtual Universe is composed of waves at a "rest state"...zero interruptions in the flow. When an object is introduced into this environment only it's "frequency" (virtual size, density, surface features, etc.) produce an interruption in the "neutral flow" in the rest state of the "virtual universe". This collision of frequencies produces the interruption necessary to produce a high definition image with infinite dimensions. Frequencies have no restricted resolutions, without having to add endless numbers of polygons or to deal with mappings on Constructive Solid Geometry models. Soundtracks could be used for not only the complete structure of s film, but also as a sculptors tool. Sound can be used three-dimensionally to create forms. Intersections of wavelengths are much more detailed in interaction but much less detailed in data because of the "harmonics" caused by the interaction. These harmonics can produce three-dimensional effects that could never be compared to the look of CGI seen in today's current films and animation's. Animation is no longer calculated out as "photographs of time" but rather time is rendered out in one block of 3D "frozen time" where you can cut-out time in as thinly or angular slices as you want...motion blur is an automatic result of frequency interaction. The surface attributes of objects behave as they would in the "real world". Because of the way surfaces or geometry frequencies interrupt space based in their physical characteristics rather than only their surface characteristics the look is automatically more natural. The information carried "modulated" in the field interruptions is very small, and is 'loaded" or "implemented" faster than current techniques. As in AC house electricity you can modulate information over the signal with no loss of power. The same goes for CGI frequencies....Interested?...look deeper, then give me a hoot.
Brian K. Drescher is a 3D animator and designer currently the director of 3D4Color in Amsterdam. Brian and family now live south of Amsterdam in Kudelstaart. He can be reached by email at bkdresch@xs4all.nl and has a homepage at www.xs4all.nl/~bkdresch.