skip to main content
research-article
Open Access

Kernel-predicting convolutional networks for denoising Monte Carlo renderings

Published:20 July 2017Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Regression-based algorithms have shown to be good at denoising Monte Carlo (MC) renderings by leveraging its inexpensive by-products (e.g., feature buffers). However, when using higher-order models to handle complex cases, these techniques often overfit to noise in the input. For this reason, supervised learning methods have been proposed that train on a large collection of reference examples, but they use explicit filters that limit their denoising ability. To address these problems, we propose a novel, supervised learning approach that allows the filtering kernel to be more complex and general by leveraging a deep convolutional neural network (CNN) architecture. In one embodiment of our framework, the CNN directly predicts the final denoised pixel value as a highly non-linear combination of the input features. In a second approach, we introduce a novel, kernel-prediction network which uses the CNN to estimate the local weighting kernels used to compute each denoised pixel from its neighbors. We train and evaluate our networks on production data and observe improvements over state-of-the-art MC denoisers, showing that our methods generalize well to a variety of scenes. We conclude by analyzing various components of our architecture and identify areas of further research in deep learning for MC denoising.

References

  1. Martín Abadi, Ashish Agarwal, Paul Barham,, and others. 2015. TensorFlow: Large-Scale Machine Learning on Heterogeneous Systems. (2015). http://tensorflow.org/Softwareavailablefromtensorflow.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. David Balduzzi, Brian McWilliams, and Tony Butler-Yeoman. 2016. Neural Taylor Approximations: Convergence and Exploration in Rectifier Networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.02345 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Pablo Bauszat, Martin Eisemann, and Marcus Magnor. 2011. Guided Image Filtering for Interactive High-quality Global Illumination. Computer Graphics Forum 30, 4 (2011), 1361--1368. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Benedikt Bitterli. 2016. Rendering Resources. (2016). https://benedikt-bitterli.me/resources/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Benedikt Bitterli, Fabrice Rousselle, Bochang Moon, José A. Iglesias-Guitián, David Adler, Kenny Mitchell, Wojciech Jarosz, and Jan Novák. 2016. Nonlinearly Weighted First-order Regression for Denoising Monte Carlo Renderings. Computer Graphics Forum 35, 4 (2016), 107--117. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Antoni Buades, Bartomeu Coll, and Jean-Michel Morel. 2005. A Review of Image Denoising Algorithms, with a New One. Multiscale Modeling & Simulation 4, 2 (2005), 490--530. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. H. C. Burger, C.J. Schuler, and S. Harmeling. 2012. Image Denoising: Can Plain Neural Networks Compete with BM3D?. In 2012 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 2392--2399. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Chakravarty R. A. Chaitanya, Anton Kaplanyan, Christoph Schied, Marco Salvi, Aaron Lefohn, Derek Nowrouzezahrai, and Timo Aila. 2017. Interactive Reconstruction of Noisy Monte Carlo Image Sequences using a Recurrent Autoencoder. ACM Trans. Graph. (Proc. SIGGRAPH) (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Robert L. Cook, Loren Carpenter, and Edwin Catmull. 1987. The Reyes Image Rendering Architecture. SIGGRAPH Comput. Graph. 21, 4 (Aug. 1987), 95--102. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Kostadin Dabov, Alessandro Foi, Vladimir Katkovnik, and Karen Egiazarian. 2006. Image Denoising with Block-Matching and 3D Filtering. (2006).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Jerome Friedman, Trevor Hastie, and Robert Tibshirani. 2001. The Elements of Statistical Learning. Vol. 1. Springer series in statistics Springer, Berlin.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Michaël Gharbi, Gaurav Chaurasia, Sylvain Paris, and Frédo Durand. 2016. Deep Joint Demosaicking and Denoising. ACM Trans. Graph. 35, 6, Article 191 (Nov. 2016), 12 pages.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Xavier Glorot and Yoshua Bengio. 2010. Understanding the Difficulty of Training Deep Feedforward Neural Networks. In International conference on artificial intelligence and statistics. 249--256.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Luke Goddard. 2014. Silencing the Noise on Elysium. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2014 Talks (SIGGRAPH '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 38, 1 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. 2016. Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition. In IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). http://arxiv.org/abs/1512.03385Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. James T. Kajiya. 1986. The Rendering Equation. SIGGRAPH Comput. Graph. 20, 4 (Aug. 1986), 143--150. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Nima Khademi Kalantari, Steve Bako, and Pradeep Sen. 2015. A Machine Learning Approach for Filtering Monte Carlo Noise. 34, 4, Article 122 (July 2015), 12 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Nima Khademi Kalantari and Pradeep Sen. 2013. Removing the Noise in Monte Carlo Rendering with General Image Denoising Algorithms. 32, 2pt1 (2013), 93--102.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. A. Keller, L. Fascione, M. Fajardo, I. Georgiev, P. Christensen, J. Hanika, C. Eisenacher, and G. Nichols. 2015. The Path Tracing Revolution in the Movie Industry. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2015 Courses (SIGGRAPH '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 24, 7 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Diederik P. Kingma and Jimmy Ba. 2014. Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization. CoRR abs/1412.6980 (2014). http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6980Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Diederik P Kingma and Max Welling. 2013. Auto-Encoding Variational Bayes. In International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Yann LeCun, Yoshua Bengio, and Geoffrey Hinton. 2015. Deep Learning. Nature 521 (2015), 436--444. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Christian Ledig, Lucas Theis, Ferenc Huszár, Jose Caballero, Andrew Cunningham, Alejandro Acosta, Andrew Aitken, Alykhan Tejani, Johannes Totz, Zehan Wang, and others. 2016. Photo-Realistic Single Image Super-Resolution using a Generative Adversarial Network. arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.04802 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Tzu-Mao Li, Yu-Ting Wu, and Yung-Yu Chuang. 2012. SURE-based Optimization for Adaptive Sampling and Reconstruction. ACM Trans. Graph. 31, 6, Article 194 (Nov. 2012), 9 pages.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Michael D. McCool. 1999. Anisotropic Diffusion for Monte Carlo Noise Reduction. ACM Transactions on Graphics 18, 2 (April 1999), 171--194. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Bochang Moon, Nathan Carr, and Sung-Eui Yoon. 2014. Adaptive Rendering Based on Weighted Local Regression. ACM Trans. Graph. 33, 5 (Sept. 2014), 170:1--170:14.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Bochang Moon, Jong Yun Jun, JongHyeob Lee, Kunho Kim, Toshiya Hachisuka, and Sung-Eui Yoon. 2013. Robust Image Denoising Using a Virtual Flash Image for Monte Carlo Ray Tracing. Computer Graphics Forum 32, 1 (2013), 139--151. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Bochang Moon, Steven McDonagh, Kenny Mitchell, and Markus Gross. 2016. Adaptive Polynomial Rendering. To appear in ACM Trans. Graph. (Proc. SIGGRAPH) (2016), 10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Aaron van den Oord, Sander Dieleman, Heiga Zen, Karen Simonyan, Oriol Vinyals, Alex Graves, Nal Kalchbrenner, Andrew Senior, and Koray Kavukcuoglu. 2016. Wavenet: A Generative Model for Raw Audio. arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.03499 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Fabrice Rousselle, Claude Knaus, and Matthias Zwicker. 2011. Adaptive Sampling and Reconstruction using Greedy Error Minimization. ACM Trans. Graph. 30, 6, Article 159 (Dec. 2011), 12 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Fabrice Rousselle, Claude Knaus, and Matthias Zwicker. 2012. Adaptive Rendering with Non-local Means Filtering. 31, 6, Article 195 (Nov. 2012), 11 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Fabrice Rousselle, Marco Manzi, and Matthias Zwicker. 2013. Robust Denoising using Feature and Color Information. Computer Graphics Forum 32, 7 (2013), 121--130. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Holly E. Rushmeier and Gregory J. Ward. 1994. Energy Preserving Non-Linear Filters. In Proc. 21st annual Conf. on Computer graphics and interactive techniques (SIGGRAPH '94). ACM, 131--138. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Tim Salimans and Diederik P Kingma. 2016. Weight Normalization: A Simple Reparameterization to Accelerate Training of Deep Neural Networks. In Adv in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Pradeep Sen and Soheil Darabi. 2012. On Filtering the Noise from the Random Parameters in Monte Carlo Rendering. ACM Transactions on Graphics 31, 3, Article 18 (June 2012), 15 pages.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Pradeep Sen, Matthias Zwicker, Fabrice Rousselle, Sung-Eui Yoon, and Nima Khademi Kalantari. 2015. Denoising Your Monte Carlo Renders: Recent Advances in Image-space Adaptive Sampling and Reconstruction. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2015 Courses. ACM, 11. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Karen Simonyan and Andrew Zisserman. 2014. Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognition. arXiv preprint arXiv:1409.1556 (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Charles M. Stein. 1981. Estimation of the Mean of a Multivariate Normal Distribution. The Annals of Statistics 9, 6 (1981), 1135--1151. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2240405 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Zhou Wang, A.C. Bovik, H.R. Sheikh, and E.P. Simoncelli. 2004. Image Quality Assessment: from Error Visibility to Structural Similarity. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 13, 4 (April 2004), 600--612. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Junyuan Xie, Linli Xu, and Enhong Chen. 2012. Image Denoising and Inpainting with Deep Neural Networks. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 341--349.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Wenhan Yang, Jiashi Feng, Jianchao Yang, Fang Zhao, Jiaying Liu, Zongming Guo, and Shuicheng Yan. 2016. Deep Edge Guided Recurrent Residual Learning for Image Super-Resolution. CoRR abs/1604.08671 (2016). http://arxiv.org/abs/1604.08671Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Kai Zhang, Wangmeng Zuo, Yunjin Chen, Deyu Meng, and Lei Zhang. 2016. Beyond a Gaussian Denoiser: Residual Learning of Deep CNN for Image Denoising. arXiv preprint arXiv:1608.03981 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Henning Zimmer, Fabrice Rousselle, Wenzel Jakob, Oliver Wang, David Adler, Wojciech Jarosz, Olga Sorkine-Hornung, and Alexander Sorkine-Hornung. 2015. Path-space Motion Estimation and Decomposition for Robust Animation Filtering. Computer Graphics Forum 34, 4 (2015), 131--142. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Matthias Zwicker, Wojciech Jarosz, Jaakko Lehtinen, Bochang Moon, Ravi Ramamoorthi, Fabrice Rousselle, Pradeep Sen, Cyril Soler, and Sung-Eui Yoon. 2015. Recent Advances in Adaptive Sampling and Reconstruction for Monte Carlo Rendering. 34, 2 (May 2015), 667--681.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Kernel-predicting convolutional networks for denoising Monte Carlo renderings

    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

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Transactions on Graphics
      ACM Transactions on Graphics  Volume 36, Issue 4
      August 2017
      2155 pages
      ISSN:0730-0301
      EISSN:1557-7368
      DOI:10.1145/3072959
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2017 Owner/Author

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 20 July 2017
      Published in tog Volume 36, Issue 4

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader