You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I really enjoyed your illuminating article on IBL: Diffuse irradiance and Specular IBL.
But I am very much curious why you wrote the following paragraph, with the accompanying picture of hemisphere:
To convolute an environment map we solve the integral for each output wo
sample direction by discretely sampling a large number of directions wi
over the hemisphere Ω and averaging their radiance. The hemisphere we build the sample directions wi
from is oriented towards the output wo sample direction we're convoluting.
This pre-computed cubemap, that for each sample direction wo
stores the integral result, can be thought of as the pre-computed sum of all indirect diffuse light of the scene hitting some surface aligned along direction wo
. Such a cubemap is known as an irradiance map seeing as the convoluted cubemap effectively allows us to directly sample the scene's (pre-computed) irradiance from any direction wo
Q1. L0(p,w0) is the same regardless of the value of w0. So I find the statement:
Such a cubemap is known as an irradiance map seeing as the convoluted cubemap effectively allows us to directly sample the scene's (pre-computed) irradiance from any direction wo.
.
What do you mean by this if L0(p,w0) is the same regardless of the value of w0 ?
Q2. Later on, under section "Cubemap convolution", you again say:
Since the orientation of the hemisphere decides where we capture the irradiance, we can pre-calculate the irradiance for every possible hemisphere orientation oriented around all outgoing directions wo.
But immediately you say the following:
To determine the amount of indirect diffuse (irradiant) light at a fragment surface, we retrieve the total irradiance from the hemisphere oriented around its surface normal.
The following picture is given to help understand this statement:
.
The two pictures seem to say the same thing. But one use w0 to represent the orientation of the hemisphere. The other uses
N to do the same thing.
Q3. Is N the same as n which occurs in the equation ?
L0(p, wo) = kd * 3/pi * int_{Omega} Li(p,wi) n dot wI dwi.
I think so, but I would like to double check it.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi, Joey de Vries.
I really enjoyed your illuminating article on IBL: Diffuse irradiance and Specular IBL.
But I am very much curious why you wrote the following paragraph, with the accompanying picture of hemisphere:
To convolute an environment map we solve the integral for each output wo
sample direction by discretely sampling a large number of directions wi
over the hemisphere Ω and averaging their radiance. The hemisphere we build the sample directions wi
from is oriented towards the output wo sample direction we're convoluting.
This pre-computed cubemap, that for each sample direction wo
stores the integral result, can be thought of as the pre-computed sum of all indirect diffuse light of the scene hitting some surface aligned along direction wo
. Such a cubemap is known as an irradiance map seeing as the convoluted cubemap effectively allows us to directly sample the scene's (pre-computed) irradiance from any direction wo
Q1. L0(p,w0) is the same regardless of the value of w0. So I find the statement:
Such a cubemap is known as an irradiance map seeing as the convoluted cubemap effectively allows us to directly sample the scene's (pre-computed) irradiance from any direction wo.
.
What do you mean by this if L0(p,w0) is the same regardless of the value of w0 ?
Q2. Later on, under section "Cubemap convolution", you again say:
Since the orientation of the hemisphere decides where we capture the irradiance, we can pre-calculate the irradiance for every possible hemisphere orientation oriented around all outgoing directions wo.
But immediately you say the following:
To determine the amount of indirect diffuse (irradiant) light at a fragment surface, we retrieve the total irradiance from the hemisphere oriented around its surface normal.
The following picture is given to help understand this statement:
.
The two pictures seem to say the same thing. But one use w0 to represent the orientation of the hemisphere. The other uses
N to do the same thing.
Q3. Is N the same as n which occurs in the equation ?
L0(p, wo) = kd * 3/pi * int_{Omega} Li(p,wi) n dot wI dwi.
I think so, but I would like to double check it.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: