Paper detail

A Qualitative and Quantitative Evaluation of 8 Clear Sky Models

We provide a qualitative and quantitative evaluation of 8 clear sky models used in Computer Graphics. We compare the models with each other as well as with measurements and with a reference model from the physics community. After a short summary of the physics of the problem, we present the measurements and the reference model, and how we "invert" it to get the model parameters. We then give an overview of each CG model, and detail its scope, its algorithmic complexity, and its results using the same parameters as in the reference model. We also compare the models with a perceptual study. Our quantitative results confirm that the less simplifications and approximations are used to solve the physical equations, the more accurate are the results. We conclude with a discussion of the advantages and drawbacks of each model, and how to further improve their accuracy.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.