Maximal-abstract differences for comparing direct volume rendering algorithms

HP Laboratories Technical Report

Volumn , Issue 40, 2000, Pages

  Kwansik, Kim ^a,b   Wittenbrink, Craig M ^a   Pang, Alex ^a,b  

^a HEWLETT PACKARD LABORATORIES   (United States)

^b University of California Santa Cruz   (United States)

Author keywords

Data level comparison; Gradient; Image level comparison; Image quality; Metrics; Opacity; Test data; Uncertainty visualization; Volume visualization

Indexed keywords

DIRECT VOLUME RENDERING (DVR); IMAGE LEVEL COMPARISON; METRICS; RENDERING;

COLOR COMPUTER GRAPHICS; DATA RECORDING; GRADIENT INDEX OPTICS; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; OPACITY; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; PROJECTION SYSTEMS; VISUALIZATION;

ALGORITHMS;

EID: 84862440438     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (25)

1. Mark J. Bentum, Barthold B.A. Lichtenbelt, and Thomas Malzbender. Frequency analysis of gradient estimators in volume rendering. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 2(3):242-254, September 1996.
2. Ajeetkumar Gaddipatti, Raghu Machiraju, and Roni Yagel. Steering image generation with wavelet based perceptual metric. Computer Graphics Forum, 16(3):C241-251, C391, September 1997.
3. A. Globus and S. Uselton. Evaluation of visualization software. Computer Graphics, pages 41-44, May 1995.
4. M.E. Goss. An adjustable gradient filter for volume visualization image enhancement. In Proceedings Graphics Interface, pages 67-74, 1994.
5. Kwansik Kim and Alex Pang. A methodology for comparing direct volume rendering algorithms using a projection-based data level approach. In Eurographics/IEEE TVCG Symposium on Visualization, pages 87-98, Vienna, Austria, May 1999.
6. Kwansik Kim and Alex Pang. Ray-based data level comparative visualization of direct volume rendering algorithms. In Scientific Visualization, Dagstuhl Workshop Proceedings (to appear). IEEE Computer Society, 2000.
7. Philippe Lacroute and Marc Levoy. Fast volume rendering using a shear-warp factorization of the viewing transformation. In Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 94, pages 451-458, Orlando, FL, July 1994.
8. David Laur and Pat Hanrahan. Hierarchical splatting: A progressive refinement algorithm for volume rendering. In Computer Graphics (ACM Siggraph Proceedings), volume 25, pages 285-288, July 1991.
9. Marc Levoy. Display of surfaces from volume data. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 8(5):29-37, May 1988.
10. R. Machiraju and R. Yagel. Reconstruction error characterization and control: A sampling theory approach. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, pages 364-378, December 1996.
11. S. R. Marschner and R. J. Lobb. An evaluation of reconstruction filters for volume rendering. In Proceedings of Visualization, pages 100-107. IEEE, October 1994.
12. Nelson Max. Optical models for direct volume rendering. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 1(2):99-108, June 1995.
13. Torsten Möller, Klaus Müller, Yair Kurzion, Raghu Machiraju, and Roni Yagel. Design of accurate and smooth filters for function and derivative reconstruction. In Proceedings of the 1998 Symposium on Volume Visualization, pages 143-151, October 1998.
14. Ulrich Neumann. Volume Reconstruction and Parallel Rendering Algorithms: A Comparative Analysis. PhD thesis, UNC, Chapel Hill, 1993.
15. Hans-Georg Pagendarm and Frits H. Post. Studies in comparative visualization of flow features. In G. Nielson, H. Hagen, and H. Muller, editors, Scientific Visualization: Overviews, Methodologies, Techniques, pages 211-227. IEEE Computer Society, 1997.
16. A. Pang, C.M. Wittenbrink, and S. K. Lodha. Approaches to uncertainty visualization. The Visual Computer, 13(8):370-390, 1997.
17. Nivedita Sahasrabudhe, John E. West, Raghu Machiraju, and Mark Janus. Structured spatial domain image and data comparison metrics. In Proceedings of Visualization 99, pages 97-104,515, 1999.
18. U. Tiede, K.H. Hohne, M. Bomans, A. Pommert, M. Riemer, and G. Wiebecke. Surface rendering: Investigation of medical 3D-rendering algorithms. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 10(2):41-53, March 1990.
19. Allen Van Gelder and Kwansik Kim. Direct volume rendering with shading via 3D textures. In ACM/IEEE Symposium on Volume Visualization, pages 22-30, San Francisco, CA, October 1996.
20. J. Terwisscha van Scheltinga, M.K. Bosma, J. Smit, and S. Lobregt. Image quality improvements in volume rendering. In Lecture notes in computer science, (Fourth International Conference on Visualization in Biomedical Computing) VBC'96, volume 1131, pages 87-92. Springer-Verlag, September 1996.
21. L. Westover. Footprint evaluation for volume rendering. In Computer Graphics, pages 367-376, August 1990.
22. Jane Wilhelms and Allen Van Gelder. A coherent projection approach for direct volume rendering. In Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 91, pages 275-284, 1991.
23. Peter L. Williams and Samuel P. Uselton. Metrics and generation specifications for comparing volume-rendered images. The Journal of Visualization and Computer Animation, 10:159-178, 1999.
24. Craig M. Wittenbrink, Thomas Malzbender, and Michael E. Goss. Opacity-weighted color interpolation for volume sampling. In Proceedings of the 1998 Symposium on Volume Visualization, pages 135-142, color plate page 177, October 1998. Also available as Technical Report, HPL-97-31R2, Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Palo Alto, CA, Revised Apr. 1998.
25. Craig M. Wittenbrink and A. K. Somani. Time and space optimal parallel volume rendering using permutation warping. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 46(2):148-164, November 1997.