[Bf-committers] Shading System Proposals

Yves Poissant ypoissant2 at videotron.ca
Wed Jan 6 03:15:31 CET 2010


>> One thing that I seem to observe is that the hit to camera needs to be
>> pretty much hard-wired and the light to hit too. Is that right?
> It depends a bit, but if you want the rendering algorithm to support
> all possible node setups, then yes that needs to be hard-wired. But if
> it doesn't make sense for some algorithm to support e.g. a Light node,
> then that can just be not supported there.

I think the way I see the BSDF node (or node setup) is pretty much unlinked 
to and from other nodes. Explicitly linking the light and the output on the 
BSDF seems of limited use. I understand that it can allow someone to 
experiment and invent creative ways of rendering but that is not an aspect I 
want to concentrate on for now.

>> How are multiple-reflection bounces represented in a nodes setup? 
>> Implicitly
>> or explicitly?
> Implicitly, bounces would use the BSDF.

I agree. The BSDF node setup needs to be usable as standalone and just 
associated to a material that is associated to a surface. At least that is 
how I imagine its use in a general rendering algorithm. The node would then 
be called by the rendering algorithm through its association with the hit 
surface. I can imagine a standard interface between a node setup designed to 
be used as a BSDF. The outher shell-node would supply this interface and the 
user could go very wild inside the outher shell node and be very creative 
with the BSDF behavior.

> Not sure
> how to do emission yet, I guess there needs to be a separate output
> for that as well in which a color would be plugged (or should that be
> an EDF?).

I can see a light node onto which we could link a color or a texture and a 
distribution function. But it gets more complicated when any object can 
become an emiter. An object can be both emissive with a specific emission 
pattern and its surface can be reflective with a different reflectance 
pattern. Normally, the light color is filtered by the object surface color. 
But you will probablay want to keep a maximum of flexibility and allow a 
very different emission color pattern from the surface color pattern. It is 
not obvious to me neither how to represent that with nodes. And uniformly 
sampling an arbitrary morphology object is not trivial.

Although measured BSDF data are not common, measured EDF data are quite 
common these days and available from amany light fixture manufacturers. 
Otherwise, the directional emission pattern can be simulated with 
traditional distribution function just like on BSDFs.

Also, there is the issue of directional lights (sun lights) in GI 
algorithms. Some thoughts need to be done on that. It is very innefficient 
to throw samples and hope to hit something usefull in situation where the 
sun is shining through windows. Metropolis Light Transport can handle those 
situation quite well but for other GI rendering algorithms, it is more 
efficient to associate sun lights with those windows in some ways. There 
come the concept of light port or photon ports. But how to represent that 
with nodes?

>> BTW, I assume that the Light node represents any light in the scene. Or 
>> is
>> one Light node associated to only one light in the scene?
> That would be configurable, the default would be all lights, but I
> guess you would be able to set a light group.

There too, I see the light node setup as being usable standalone, just 
associated to a material and a surface and be called by the rendering 
algorithm. In hard-wired light to BSDF node setups, an efficiency issue 
would be how to importance sample the lights in a scene with multiple 
lights, each with its own emission characteristic. Still the same question 
rises: How to represent that with nodes?


More information about the Bf-committers mailing list