Video Rendering via Key Frame Segmentation and Motion Estimation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Generating video content using ray tracing is computationally intensive, requiring significant time and resources, especially in processes like rendering and compression.

Innovation Solution

Implementing a joint rendering and compression process that uses low-cost, low-complexity rendering methods for most frames and full-detail ray-tracing only for key frames, while leveraging three-dimensional scene geometry to estimate motion and reduce computation time.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If full-detail ray-tracing is used for all frames, then video quality is improved, but rendering time increases significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvevideo qualityVSAvoidrendering time
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments video frames into two categories: key frames rendered with full-detail ray-tracing and intermediate frames rendered with low-cost methods. This segmentation allows the system to maintain high quality for important frames while using efficient approximation techniques for less critical frames, thereby resolving the contradiction between video quality and rendering time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies local quality by using high-quality ray-tracing only where necessary (key frames) and lower-quality rendering for other frames. This selective approach ensures that computational resources are concentrated on frames that most impact overall video quality, while reducing time consumption for frames where full detail is less critical.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Manufacturing precision

If full-detail ray-tracing is used for all frames, then video quality is improved, but computational resources increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvevideo qualityVSAvoidcomputational resources
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the rendering process into high-quality key frame generation and low-cost intermediate frame generation. This segmentation reduces overall computational resource requirements by applying full-detail ray-tracing only to a subset of frames, while using efficient approximation algorithms for the remaining frames.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent uses motion estimation and compensation techniques to copy and adapt information from key frames to intermediate frames. By leveraging the relationship between consecutive frames and using motion vectors to transfer information, the system avoids redundant full-detail rendering while maintaining visual quality.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

3Productivity

If low-cost rendering methods are used for all frames, then rendering time is reduced, but video quality deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverendering speedVSAvoidvideo quality
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments frames into key frames requiring high quality and intermediate frames where speed is prioritized. This segmentation allows the system to achieve high overall rendering speed while maintaining quality where it matters most through selective application of rendering techniques.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent employs motion estimation and compensation mechanisms that provide feedback between frames. By analyzing motion patterns and using this information to guide rendering decisions, the system can maintain quality consistency across frames rendered with different methods, reducing the quality loss from using low-cost techniques.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

4Quantity of substance

If compression is applied to reduce file size, then storage efficiency is improved, but compression artifacts may reduce perceived quality

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefile sizeVSAvoidperceived quality
Core Design Contradiction:
Quantity of substanceVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent performs preliminary rendering at high quality for key frames before compression is applied. By ensuring that the source material for compression is of high quality, the system minimizes the impact of compression artifacts on perceived quality, allowing for more aggressive compression ratios.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes rendering parameters dynamically based on frame type and motion characteristics. By adjusting quality levels, compression settings, and rendering detail based on scene complexity and motion, the system optimizes the balance between file size and perceived quality for different portions of the video.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS11704862B1Generating video content
Publication Date: 2023.07.18 OUTWARD INC
  • US11704862B1 patent drawing
  • US11704862B1 patent drawing
  • US11704862B1 patent drawing

AI summary

Improved techniques for generating video content are disclosed. In some embodiments, it is determined whether a frame comprising a scene is an independent frame or a predictive frame. In the event that the frame is an independent frame, the frame is encoded independently. In the event that the frame is a predictive frame, block differences and motion vectors are encoded, wherein motion vectors are determined from a known three-dimensional model and time evolution of the scene.