• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Lode

Something between bilinear and bicubic interpolation?

7 posts in this topic

Hello,

 

Bilinear interpolation generates visible crosses, see image from wikipedia to see what I mean, I mean the horizontal and vertical structures and sharp edges:

 

jLg2YP4.png

 

Bicubic interpolation looks much rounder:

 

RedJIfK.png

 

 

 

Imagine now that the colors are types of world (tundra, desert, grass, ...): the rounder shapes are *highly* preferable over the ugly "crosses" of bilinear interpolation.

 

However, bicubic interpolation has two disadvantages (the second being the most problematic for me):

 

1.) It requires 16 points, rather than only 4 points. It would be highly preferable for me to only have to use the 4 corners of a square zone, not corner points of neighboring zones as well

2.) Values can overshoot, that is, they can become lower or higher than the 4 corners of this zone. I really don't want this, "conditions" in a zone should be bounded by its corners for convenience reasons (predictable range of values in a zone).

 

So, the question is:

Does there exist a way of 2D interpolating that only uses 4 corner points and only returns values in that range, but, looks "rounder" than bilinear interpolation?

Thanks! smile.png

Edited by Lode
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally prefer Bezier (it doesn't overshoot, hits each control point exactly, and look absolutely gorgeous).

 

How does that work? The cubic bezier on Wikipedia does not hit each control point, only the outer two - but then it's also 2D intead of 1D:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%C3%A9zier_curve

 

Can this be calculated in a way similar to bicubic interpolation? I couldn't find anything.

 

THanks a lot!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I personally prefer Bezier (it doesn't overshoot, hits each control point exactly, and look absolutely gorgeous).

 

How does that work? The cubic bezier on Wikipedia does not hit each control point, only the outer two - but then it's also 2D intead of 1D:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%C3%A9zier_curve

 

Can this be calculated in a way similar to bicubic interpolation? I couldn't find anything.

 

Look no further than Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bezier_patch

 

Basically, you do Bézier interpolation between Bézier curves along the additional parameter dimension.

 

However, a really good looking surface is going to need data beyond the 4 vertex heights of one rectangular grid cell, because it needs good looking normals at grid vertices, and figuring them out from other grid vertices is better than assigning fixed normals (all up, like in "smoothstep" C1 alternatives to C0 linear interpolation) or random normals (which would show patterns). Storing a precomputed normal (or even a normal and curvature) for each vertex might be more convenient than looking up adjacent vertices.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I personally prefer Bezier (it doesn't overshoot, hits each control point exactly, and look absolutely gorgeous).

 

How does that work? The cubic bezier on Wikipedia does not hit each control point, only the outer two - but then it's also 2D intead of 1D:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%C3%A9zier_curve

 

Can this be calculated in a way similar to bicubic interpolation? I couldn't find anything.

 

THanks a lot!

 

 

You may be right...  I implemented it all years ago, so TBH I can't find my source material.  The code I use for interpolation has served me very well over the years, but perhaps I was mistaken and I thought I was using a bezier spline when in fact I was using another type.  Or perhaps it actually doesn't hit every control point exactly.  Clearly I'll have to take another look at it.

 

Perhaps I was thinking of Catmull-Rom splines when I said they hit every control point exactly and don't overshoot.  And when I said Bezier spline I probably meant BSpline.

Edited by Ryan_001
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mathematically, the Bezier formulation is equivalent to the normal bicubic and bilinear interpolation formulas. It's really only a different basis: power vs Bernstein basis. However, the Bezier form handles the "control point" vertices more naturally than the power basis.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0