Efficient Freeform Lens Optimization for Computational Caustic Displays
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Efficient freeform lens optimization for computational caustic displays Gerwin Damberg1;3 and Wolfgang Heidrich2;1;4 1Department of Computer Science, University of British Columbia 2Visual Computing Center, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology [email protected] [email protected] www.cs.ubc.ca/ gdamberg/ Abstract: Phase-only light modulation shows great promise for many imaging applications, including future projection displays. While images can be formed efficiently by avoiding per-pixel attenuation of light most projection efforts utilizing phase-only modulators are based on holographic principles utilizing interference of coherent laser light and a Fourier lens. Limitations of this type of an approach include scaling to higher power as well as visible artifacts such as speckle and image noise. We propose an alternative approach: operating the spatial phase modulator with broadband illumination by treating it as a programmable freeform lens. We describe a simple optimization approach for generating phase modulation patterns or freeform lenses that, when illuminated by a colli- mated, broadband light source, will project a pre-defined caustic image on a designated image plane. The optimization procedure is based on a simple geometric optics image formation model and can be implemented compu- tationally efficient. We perform simulations and show early experimental results that suggest that the implementation on a phase-only modulator can create structured light fields suitable, for example, for efficient illumination of a spatial light modulator (SLM) within a traditional projector. In an alternative application, the algorithm provides a fast way to compute geometries for static, freeform lens manufacturing. © 2015 Optical Society of America OCIS codes: (080.4225) Nonspherical lens design; (120.2040) Displays; (100.3190) Inverse problems; (110.1758) Computational imaging. References and links 1. L. Lesem, P. Hirsch, and J. Jordan, “The kinoform: a new wavefront reconstruction device,” IBM Journal of Research and Development 13, 150–155 (1969). 2. P. R. Haugen, H. Bartelt, and S. K. Case, “Image formation by multifacet holograms,” Applied Optics 22, 2822– 2829 (1983). 3. G. Damberg, H. Seetzen, G. Ward, W. Heidrich, and L. Whitehead, “3.2: High dynamic range projection sys- tems,” in “SID Symposium Digest of Technical Papers,” , vol. 38 (Wiley Online Library, 2007), vol. 38, pp. 4–7. 4. M. Berry, “Oriental magic mirrors and the laplacian image,” European journal of physics 27, 109 (2006). 5. M. Papas, W. Jarosz, W. Jakob, S. Rusinkiewicz, W. Matusik, and T. Weyrich, “Goal-based caustics,” in “Com- puter Graphics Forum,” , vol. 30 (Wiley Online Library, 2011), vol. 30, pp. 503–511. 6. T. Kiser, M. Eigensatz, M. M. Nguyen, P. Bompas, and M. Pauly, Architectural CausticsControlling Light with Geometry (Springer, 2013). 7. Y. Schwartzburg, R. Testuz, A. Tagliasacchi, and M. Pauly, “High-contrast computational caustic design,” ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 33, 74 (2014). 8. Y. Yue, K. Iwasaki, B.-Y. Chen, Y. Dobashi, and T. Nishita, “Pixel art with refracted light by rearrangeable sticks,” in “Computer Graphics Forum,” , vol. 31 (Wiley Online Library, 2012), vol. 31, pp. 575–582. 9. Y. Ohno, “Color rendering and luminous efficacy of white led spectra,” in “Optical Science and Technology, the SPIE 49th Annual Meeting,” (International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2004), pp. 88–98. 1. Introduction In this work we propose to use phase only spatial light modulation combined with broadband illumination for image formation. We achieve this by treating the spatial phase modulator as a programmable freeform lens, and devising a simple and computationally efficient optimization procedure to derive a lens surface or modulation pattern that will form a caustic representing a predefined target image when illuminated by a collimated, broadband light source. Our research draws from a number of different research fields, including: Holographic Displays. Early holographic image formation models [1] have been adapted to create digital holograms [2]. Most of the common approaches require coherent light which has several disadvantages. Coherent light can result in high resolution artifacts, including screen speckle and diffraction on structures such as the discrete pixel grid of a SLM. On the other hand, using broadband light sources can eliminate screen speckle, and low-frequency modulation patterns can significantly reduce diffraction artifacts. Remaining diffraction is averaged out by the broadband nature of the illumination, resulting in a small amount of blur that can be modeled and compensated for [3]. Freeform Lenses. Recently, there has been strong interest in freeform lens design, both for general lighting applications and also to generate images from caustics [4]. In the latter application, we can distinguish between discrete optimization methods that work on a pixelated version of the problem (e.g. [5]), and those that optimize for continuous surfaces without obvious pixel structures (e.g. [6, 7, 8]). The current state of the art [8] defines an optimization problem on the gradients of the lens surface, which then have to be integrated up into a height field. In addition to low computational performance, this leads to a tension between satisfying a data term (the target caustic image) and maintaining the integrability of the gradient field. In our work we derive a simple and efficient formulation in which we optimize directly for the phase function (i.e. the shape of the wavefront in the lens plane) without the need for a subsequent integration step. This is made possible by a new parameterization of the problem that allows us to express the optimization directly in the lens plane rather than the image plane. 2. Freeform Lensing 2.1. Phase Modulation Image Formation To derive the image formation model for a phase modulator, we consider the geometry shown in Fig. 1: a lens plane and an image plane (screen) are parallel to each other at focal distance f . Collimated light is incident at the lens plane from the normal direction, but a phase modulator in the lens plane distorts the phase of the light, resulting in a curved phase function p(x) which corresponds to a local deflection of the light rays. lens image plane plane f φ u-x x=(x,y) u=(u,v) phase function image p(x) i(u) Fig. 1. Geometry for image formation model: Phase modulation in lens plane at focal dis- tance f from image plane resulting in curvature of the wavefront (phase function p(x)). Light deflection. With the paraxial approximation sinf ≈ f we obtain the following equation for the mapping between x on the lens plane and u on the image plane: u(x) ≈ x + f · ∇p(x): (1) Intensity modulation. Using the above geometric mapping, we derive the intensity change associated with this distortion as follows. Let dx be a differential area on the lens plane, and let du = m(x) · dx be the differential area of the corresponding region in the image plane, where m(:) is a spatially varying magnification factor. The intensity on the image plane is then given as dx 1 i(u(x)) = i = i ; (2) du 0 m(x) 0 where i0 is the intensity of the collimated light incident at the lens plane. In the following we set i0 = 1 for simplicity of notation. lens plane image plane ε x+(0, ) u(x+(0,ε)) dx m⋅dx u(x+(ε,0)) x x+(ε,0) u(x) intensity i0 intensity i0/m Fig. 2. Intensity change due to distortion of a differential area dx. The magnification factor m(:) can be expressed in terms of the derivatives of the mapping between the lens and image planes (also compare Fig. 2): ¶ ¶ m(x) = u(x) × u(x) ≈ 1 + f · ∇2 p(x): (3) ¶x ¶y This yields the following expression for the intensity distribution in the image plane: 1 i(x + f · ∇p(x)) = : (4) 1 + f · ∇2 p(x) In other words, the magnification m, and therefore the intensity i(u) on the image plane can be directly computed from the Laplacian of the scalar phase function in the lens plane. 2.2. Optimization Problem While it is possible to directly turn the image formation mode from Equation 4 into an op- timization problem, we found that we can achieve better convergence by first linearizing the equation with a first-order Taylor approximation, which yields i(x + f · ∇p(x)) ≈ 1 − f · ∇2 p(x); (5) where the left hand side can be interpreted as a warped image ip(x) = i(x + f · ∇p(x)) for which the target intensity i(u) in the image plane has been warped backwards onto the lens plane using the geometric distortion u(x) produced by a known phase function p(x). With this parameterization, the continuous least-square optimization problem for determining the desired phase function becomes Z 2 2 pˆ(x) = argminp(x) ip(x) − 1 + f · ∇ p(x) dx: (6) x This problem can be solved by iterating between updates to the phase function and updates to the warped image, as shown in Algorithm 1: Algorithm 1 Freeform lens optimization // Initialization 0 ip(x) = i(u) while not converged do // phase update 2 (k) R (k−1) 2 p (x)=argminp(x) x ip (x) − 1 + f · ∇ p(x) dx // image warp (k) k ip (x)=i(x + f · ∇p (x)) end while After discretization of i(:) and p(:) into pixels, the phase update corresponds to solving a linear least squares problem with a discrete Laplace operator as the system matrix. We can solve this positive semi-definite system using a number of different algorithms, including Conjugate Gradient, BICGSTAB and Quasi Minimal Residual (QMR). The image warp corresponds to a texture mapping operation and can be implemented on a GPU. We implement a non-optimized prototype of the algorithm in the Matlab programming environment using QMR as the least squares solver.