Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
Texture mapping is a fundamental feature of computer graphics image generation. In current PC-based acceleration hardware, MIP (“multum in parvo”) mapping with bilinear and trilinear filtering is a commonly used filtering technique for reducing spatial aliasing artifacts. The effectiveness of this technique in reducing image aliasing at the expense of blurring is dependent upon the MIP-map level selection and the associated calculation of screen-space to texture-space pixel scaling. This paper describes an investigation of practical methods for per-pixel and per-primitive level of detail calculation. This investigation was carried out as part of the design work for a screen-space rasterization ASIC. The implementations of several algorithms of comparable visual quality are discussed, and a comparison is provided in terms of per-primitive and per-pixel computational costs |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
1998 | 10.1109/2945.765326 | Visualization and Computer Graphics, IEEE Transactions |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
antialiasing,application specific integrated circuits,image texture,interpolation,microcomputer applications,spatial filters,MIP-map level selection,PC-based acceleration hardware,algorithm implementations,bilinear filtering,blurring,computational cost,computer graphics image generation,image aliasing,image pyramid,interpolation,minification,per-pixel detail level calculation,per-primitive detail level calculation,screen-space rasterization ASIC,screen-space to texture-space pixel scaling,spatial aliasing artifact reduction,texture mapping,trilinear filtering,visual quality | Texture mapping,Mipmap,Computer vision,Image texture,Computer science,Anisotropic filtering,Image processing,Theoretical computer science,Trilinear filtering,Artificial intelligence,Texture filtering,Bilinear interpolation | Journal |
Volume | Issue | ISSN |
4 | 4 | 1077-2626 |
Citations | PageRank | References |
16 | 1.81 | 15 |
Authors | ||
4 | ||
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jon P Ewins | 1 | 32 | 4.51 |
| Marcus Waller | 2 | 28 | 4.76 |
| Martin White | 3 | 274 | 29.51 |
| Paul F. Lister | 4 | 16 | 2.15 |