skip to main content
article

Vector field design on surfaces

Published:01 October 2006Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Vector field design on surfaces is necessary for many graphics applications: example-based texture synthesis, nonphotorealistic rendering, and fluid simulation. For these applications, singularities contained in the input vector field often cause visual artifacts. In this article, we present a vector field design system that allows the user to create a wide variety of vector fields with control over vector field topology, such as the number and location of singularities. Our system combines basis vector fields to make an initial vector field that meets user specifications.The initial vector field often contains unwanted singularities. Such singularities cannot always be eliminated due to the Poincaré-Hopf index theorem. To reduce the visual artifacts caused by these singularities, our system allows the user to move a singularity to a more favorable location or to cancel a pair of singularities. These operations offer topological guarantees for the vector field in that they only affect user-specified singularities. We develop efficient implementations of these operations based on Conley index theory. Our system also provides other editing operations so that the user may change the topological and geometric characteristics of the vector field.To create continuous vector fields on curved surfaces represented as meshes, we make use of the ideas of geodesic polar maps and parallel transport to interpolate vector values defined at the vertices of the mesh. We also use geodesic polar maps and parallel transport to create basis vector fields on surfaces that meet the user specifications. These techniques enable our vector field design system to work for both planar domains and curved surfaces.We demonstrate our vector field design system for several applications: example-based texture synthesis, painterly rendering of images, and pencil sketch illustrations of smooth surfaces.

References

  1. Alliez, P., Cohen-Steiner, D., Devillers, O., Lévy, B., and Desbrun, M. 2003. Anisotropic polygonal remeshing. ACM Trans. Graph. 22, 3, 485--493. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Calcaterra, C. and Boldt, A. 2003. Flow-Box theorem for Lipschitz continuous vector fields. http://www.citebase.org/cgi-bin/citations?id=oai:arXiv.org:math/0305207.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Cash, J. R. and Karp, A. H. 1990. A variable order Runge-Kutta method for initial value problems with rapidly varying right-hand sides. ACM Trans. Math. Softw. 16, 201--222. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Conley, C. 1978. Isolated Invariant Sets and the Morse Index. American Mathematics Society, Providence, RI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Edelsbrunner, H., Harer, J., and Zomorodian, A. 2003. Hierarchical Morse-Smale complexes for piecewise linear 2-manifolds. Discrete Comput. Geom. 30, 87--107.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Edelsbrunner, H., Letscher, D., and Zomorodian, A. 2002. Topological persistence and simplification. Discrete Comput. Geom. 28, 511--533.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Floater, M. S. 2003. Mean value coordinates. Comput. Aided Geom. Des. 20, 1, 19--27. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Girshick, A., Interrante, V., Haker, S., and Lemoine, T. 2000. Line direction matters: An argument for the use of principal directions in 3d line drawings. In Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Non-photorealistic Animation and Rendering. 43--52. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Hale, J. and Kocak, H. 1991. Dynamics and Bifurcations. Springer-Verlag, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Hauser, H., Laramee, R. S., and Doleisch, H. 2002. State-of-the-Art report 2002 in flow visualization. Tech. Rep. TR-VRVis-2002--003, VRVis Research Center, Vienna, Austria. Jan.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Hays, J. H. and Essa, I. 2004. Image and video-based painterly animation. In Proceedings of the NPAR: 3rd International Symposium on Non-Photorealistic Animation and Rendering. 113--120. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Helman, J. L. and Hesselink, L. 1991. Visualizing vector field topology in fluid flows. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 11, 3, 36--46. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Hertzmann, A. 1998. Painterly rendering with curved brush strokes of multiple sizes. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques. 453--460. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Hertzmann, A. and Zorin, D. 2000. Illustrating smooth surfaces. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques. 517--526. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Hirsch, M. and Smale, S. 1974. Differential Equations, Dynamical Systems, and Linear Algebra. Academic Press, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Kaczynski, T., Mischaikow, K., and Mrozek, M. 2004. Computational Homology. Springer, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Kimmel, R. and Sethian, J. A. 1998. Computing geodesic paths on manifolds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 95, 15, 8431--8435.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Mischaikow, K. 2002. Topological techniques for efficient rigorous computation in dynamics. Acta Numerica, 435--478.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Mischaikow, K. and Mrozek, M. 2002. Conley index. Handbook of Dynamic Systems, North-Holland 2, 393--460.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Ni, X., Garland, M., and Hart, J. C. 2004. Fair Morse functions for extracting the topological structure of a surface mesh. ACM Trans. Graph. 23, 3, 613--622. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Polthier, K. and Preuß, E. 2003. Identifying vector fields singularities using a discrete hodge decomposition. In Mathematical Visualization. Springer-Verlag, New York. 112--134.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Polthier, K. and Schmies, M. 1998. Straightest geodesics on polyhedral surfaces. In Mathematical Visualization. Springer-Verlag, New York, 135--150.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Praun, E., Finkelstein, A., and Hoppe, H. 2000. Lapped textures. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques. 465--470. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Praun, E., Hoppe, H., Webb, M., and Finkelstein, A. 2001. Real-Time Hatching. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques. 581--586. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Rockwood, A. and Bunderwala, S. 2001. A toy vector field based on geometric algebra. In Proceedings of the Application of Geometric Algebra in Computer Science and Engineering Conference. 179--185.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Scheuermann, G., Krüger, H., Menzel, M., and Rockwood, A. P. 1998. Visualizing nonlinear vector field topology. IEEE Trans. Visualization Comput. Graph. 4, 2, 109--116. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Stam, J. 2003. Flows on surfaces of arbitrary topology. ACM Trans. Graph. 22, 3, 724--731. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Theisel, H. 2002. Designing 2d vector fields of arbitrary topology. Comput. Graph. Forum 21, 3, 595--604.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Theisel, H. and Weinkauf, T. 2002. Vector field metrics based on distance measures of first order critical points. WSCG 10, 3, 121--128.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Tong, Y., Lombeyda, S., Hirani, A., and Desbrun, M. 2003. Discrete multiscale vector field decomposition. ACM Trans. Graph. 22, 3 (July), 445--452. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Tricoche, X. 2002. Vector and tensor field topology simplification, tracking, and visualization. Ph.D. thesis, Universität Kaiserslautern.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Tricoche, X., Scheuermann, G., and Hagen, H. 2001. Continous topology simplification of planar vector fields. In Proceedings of the IEEE Visualization, Conference, 159--166. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Turk, G. 2001. Texture synthesis on surfaces. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques. 347--354. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. van Wijk, J. J. 2002. Image based flow visualization. ACM Trans. Graph. 21, 3, 745--754. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. van Wijk, J. J. 2003. Image based flow visualization for curved surfaces. In Proceedings of the IEEE Visualization Conference, 123--130. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Wei, L. Y. and Levoy, M. 2001. Texture synthesis over arbitrary manifold surfaces. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques. 355--360. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Wejchert, J. and Haumann, D. 1991. Animation aerodynamics. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques. 19--22. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Welch, W. and Witkin, A. 1994. Free-Form shape design using triangulated surfaces. In Proceedings of the 21st Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques. 247--256. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Westermann, R., Johnson, C., and Ertl, T. 2000. A level-set method for flow visualization. In Proceedings of the IEEE Visualization Conference. 147--154. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Wischgoll, T. and Scheuermann, G. 2001. Detection and visualization of planar closed streamline. IEEE Trans. Visualization Comput. Graph. 7, 2, 165--172. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Vector field design on surfaces

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader