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

[btarunr]

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.





View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[robspierre6]

This is how games should look like.

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

hope they spend as much time on the storyline and gameplay, gimmi ma munnehs worth

 

[PCpraiser100]

This is how games should look like.

Definitely. Now this is somethings that a 30" monitor can't do lol.

 

[burtram]

that is really really cool. and i also agree, they should hopefully be putting an equal amount of effort into story/gameplay, otherwise its a huge waste of money and not many will buy into these games.

 

[PCpraiser100]

hope they spend as much time on the storyline and gameplay, gimmi ma munnehs worth

I'm very sure game devs will still be working closely with those parts. As graphics get more realistic, I'm sure AMD will make the software more simple to use that even the n00b devs can use it. Reason being is because if AMD's success on their Overdrive software. For many years, ATI/AMD has looked foolish in saying that their hardware will result in astonishing graphics. As of now, they have finally proved that they kept their promise

Which means: ATI to Nvidia: EAT $H*T

 

[OzzmanFloyd120]

This is great, but did everyone forget about NV human head or something?

 

[robspierre6]

I think what games need now is:realistic visuals,artificial intelligent and improved physx.
Will we get that with DX11 games? "i hope so"
I believe AMD is working with MS on DX11 now. So, we'll probably taste some great games next year.

 

[btarunr]

And ends a caption contest within a news thread. Back to topic.

 

[a111087]

"hundreds of high-definition cameras"

wow, that will be super expensive

 

[OzzmanFloyd120]

Seriously though, did everyone seem to forget about nVidia's Human Head? This looks no different to me.

 

[btarunr]

Lighting in that was shaded, this is ray-traced. There was still an element of artificiality with that render.

 

[OzzmanFloyd120]

Hmm, I thought that ray-tracing was something that intel held the patent on?
As for human head being artificial looking it's over a year old now, tech is newer.

 

[btarunr]

No, Intel doesn't own ray-tracing. AMD did work extensively in this field, ATI has had hardware tesselators since the Xenos (Xbox 360 GPU, made by ATI) days (before R600)

 

[OzzmanFloyd120]

Hmm, I guess that's what I get for trusting PC Gamer

 

[candle_86]

Look at the hair though still looks fake, close but you still can not see seprate strands. Also the poly count is rediculous, I don't there is a video card out there that can push that many poly's at a reasonable frame rate. The Shaders took over rememeber, the Triangle setup engine has taken a back seat. Id have to say while shading has increased the poly counts have not, Crysis being a notable exception. There isnt a video card out that can do this kind of 3d model and get over 10FPS.

 

[btarunr]

Looks alright to me, those are individual strands drawn using pure geometry, unlike older attempts which used lame textures of hair all over the head.

 

[candle_86]

but I look at it and can tell just looking at the hair its fake, there is no frizz anywhere, and I don't care how well you do your hair, even super models have the tiniest amount of frizz and thats not there. Also there is no light comming in the hair such as real hair would, you'd see viable light eminating from between the hair, every person has this attrabute also. Maybe I scrutanize to much, but if you told me it was a photo id have called it a bad photochop just based on the hair

 

[tkpenalty]

This is great, but did everyone forget about NV human head or something?

Yeah but the NV head didn't look real...? AMD uses ray tracing (following laws in physics...and not crappy shaders) for these demos and afaik it looks TONS better. It allows for photorealistic renders.

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

but I look at it and can tell just looking at the hair its fake, there is no frizz anywhere, and I don't care how well you do your hair, even super models have the tiniest amount of frizz and thats not there. Also there is no light comming in the hair such as real hair would, you'd see viable light eminating from between the hair, every person has this attrabute also. Maybe I scrutanize to much, but if you told me it was a photo id have called it a bad photochop just based on the hair

Hair doesn't have to be glossy. It can be dull, etc. Supermodels usually are heavily photoshopped so that any small amount of frizz disappears.

 

[candle_86]

look closely at the hair tell me it looks real

I took sevral photo class's in high school, and I recognize that the hair is fake, the face i could belive, the hair impossible, looked at one to many photos to buy it

 

[btarunr]

Hmm, I guess that's what I get for trusting PC Gamer

Forgot about NVIDIA's recent acquisition of Rayscale? Ray-Tracing isn't owned by Intel, they're just using it as Kraft Cheese for Larrabee.

 

[mrw1986]

but I look at it and can tell just looking at the hair its fake, there is no frizz anywhere, and I don't care how well you do your hair, even super models have the tiniest amount of frizz and thats not there. Also there is no light comming in the hair such as real hair would, you'd see viable light eminating from between the hair, every person has this attrabute also. Maybe I scrutanize to much, but if you told me it was a photo id have called it a bad photochop just based on the hair

Do a better job? Also I can see frizz and stuff, maybe you have bad eyes....

 

[OzzmanFloyd120]

Yeah but the NV head didn't look real...? AMD uses ray tracing (following laws in physics...and not crappy shaders) for these demos and afaik it looks TONS better. It allows for photorealistic renders.

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

When I look at that image I wonder why the bricks on the building are glossy looking, kinda makes it tough to make the realistic argument. I'm not saying it doesn't look great, because it does look awesome. I just don't think it's any better than anything I haven't seen already.

 

[a111087]

looks good enough to me and thats what really matters

 

[InnocentCriminal]

The quality of the still (face) isn't great, however the actual face & all the details are outstanding. Candle, I honestly don't know why you say the hair is fake, it's all fake, it's CG. I think the hair looks fantastic, colleagues at work couldn't tell if it was CG or a photo. Found it really hard to judge. Even the one that practises Photography in his spare time.