rendering with pbrt - Githubissues

Junggy commented 4 years ago

I have followed your instruction, but I was not able to get 256 transient images (i rather got single *.exr file)

I downloaded ToF-pbrt-generation and installed pbrt-v3-tof
when I run pbrt, I used following command

/DirToPbrt/pbrt /DirToToF/ToF-pbrt-generation/scenes/ToFFlyingThings3D/breakfast/more.pbrt

and I got single "breakfast.exr" file in /DirToPbrt/

Also I tried to use "batch_run_pbrt.sh" but I was not able to run it as I have no clue about some variables to set like CAMFILE (I used ToF-pbrt-generation/scenes/ToFFlyingThings3D/breakfast/campath1000.txt (or campath1000_z.txt)) , MAT_PATH (I have no idea), SCENE_LIST (also have no idea) etc

can I get more detailed instruction of way to get 256 transient images?

sylqiu commented 4 years ago

Hi, in the command line you seem to be using the original pbrt binary instead of the pbrt-tof (or something named like this) binary. Can you double check which binary file is used. Let me know if this solves the problem.

On 21 Aug 2020, at 23:00, Junggy notifications@github.com wrote:

I have followed your instruction, but I was not able to get 256 transient images (i rather got single *.exr file)

I downloaded ToF-pbrt-generation and installed pbrt-v3-tof when I run pbrt, I used following command /DirToPbrt/pbrt /DirToToF/ToF-pbrt-generation/scenes/ToFFlyingThings3D/breakfast/more.pbrt

and I got single "breakfast.exr" file in /DirToPbrt/tri

Also I tried to use "batch_run_pbrt.sh" but I was not able to run it as I have no clue about some variables to set like CAMFILE (I used ToF-pbrt-generation/scenes/ToFFlyingThings3D/breakfast/campath1000.txt (or campath1000_z.txt)) , MAT_PATH (I have no idea), SCENE_LIST (also have no idea) etc

can I get more detailed instruction of way to get 256 transient images?

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

Junggy commented 4 years ago

@sylqiu So, I was able to render 256 transient images from one viewpoint

But when I get depth from those images by using "transient_to_depth.m" i.e. [phase, depth] = transient_to_depth('./', 240, 320, 256, (40:10:70)*1e6, 10);

resulting depth image doesn't seem to be promising. It was rather very noisy and looks rather like amplitude image depth (i.e. camera is looking at the corner of the room and some flying objects are in front of camera

wall on the right, intensity increases as wall gets further
wall on the left is way darker but intensity is nearly static
object right in front of the camera is partially very bright

which doesn't seems to be correct depth.)

and correlation images are also a bit strange (i.e. - first correlation image is rather white background and little black noise

second correlation image looks very close to the depth image i got
third correlation image is rather white background with intense black noise
fourth correlation image seems to be quite over-saturated version of the first correlation)

maybe Issue I have is that either from 256 transient image generation or (mostly) from correlation calculation.

is there any good way to debug this? or is it possible to share like one set of 256 transient images that I can check?

sylqiu commented 4 years ago

The phase images don't look correct. I think you may need to check two things.

play the transient volume as a video to see if there are "light in flight", to make sure you get the correct transient rendering result
find (or implement yourself) the code that retrieve of a single phase without phase unwrapping. that phase image should at least look like a depth image except it will look periodic in the z-dimension. Then check the code in transient_to_depth for the phase unwrapping part.

On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 11:31 PM Junggy notifications@github.com wrote:

So, I was able to render 256 transient images from one viewpoint

But when I get depth from those images by using "transient_to_depth.m" i.e. [phase, depth] = transient_to_depth('./', 240, 320, 256, (40:10:70)*1e6, 10);

resulting depth image doesn't seem to be promising. It was rather very noisy and looks rather like amplitude image (i.e. camera is looking at the corner of the room and some flying objects are in front of camera

wall on the right, intensity increases as wall gets further

wall on the left is way darker but intensity is nearly static

object right in front of the camera is partially very bright [image: correlation] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/45639167/91462871-fb737480-e88a-11ea-9ad2-bb2066bcc9cd.png [image: depth] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/45639167/91462876-fd3d3800-e88a-11ea-82b2-4d4e76e29a20.png

which doesn't seems to be correct depth.)

and correlation images are also a bit strange (i.e. - first correlation image is rather white background and little black noise

second correlation image looks very close to the depth image i got

third correlation image is rather white background with intense black noise

fourth correlation image looks very close to the depth image I got)

maybe Issue I have is that either from 256 transient image generation or (mostly) from correlation calculation.

is there any way that I can debug about what is wrong?

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/sylqiu/tof_rgbd_processing/issues/7#issuecomment-682022992, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AF3DRX2Y6R74GDXCAMU446LSCZ34LANCNFSM4QHL4VMQ .

-- Best regards,

Syl

luckyluliu commented 1 year ago

I get the same result of depth with yours on breakfast dataset, have you find out what is wrong??? @sylqiu @Junggy depth

luckyluliu commented 1 year ago

What do you mean by pbrt-tof, seems you only provide a 'more.pbrt', no 'more-tof.pbrt' found. What's the difference between more.pbrt and more-tof.pbrt??? @sylqiu

sylqiu / tof_rgbd_processing

rendering with pbrt #7