CS 671 / CogSci 601
Spring 2005
Omission, Distortion, and Exaggeration in Computer Graphics
Description
Computer graphics is perhaps most often about making effective visual
experiences. In these cases, the impression the viewer has of the
display is paramount: the goal is to get the viewer to see what the
display is designed to show them. It doesn't matter how the display
is made - this is where cheating comes in: omission, distortion and
exaggeration.
When we see a picture, we understand it, and our specific
interpretation highlights particular information. What we see depends
on what we're thinking and doing. Suppose you're driving to Times
Square, following a map. What you're looking for is the route - the
turnpike, to exit 16E, to the Lincoln tunnel. When you understand the
map, what you have in your head is that same route. That's your
interpretation of the map. We've all used computer systems that show you
that route directly (and are accompanied by written instructions):
(Standard map from MapBlast)
The route is labeled but you still need to heavily rely on the
accompanying text to follow the route.
Here's the fun part: there's no reason not to change the map, so that
it highlights the information you need to follow the route. The map
can leave out a lot of roads you're not taking. The map doesn't have
to preserve relative distances. And as long as viewers will know what
you mean, you're free to change things like the angles of turns.
Here's an example:

(LineDrive map from MapBlast)
In computer graphics, omission, distortion and exaggeration give you
the freedom to design a depiction that's more effective than pictures
that exactly reflect reality. Any artist already knows this - but
they have their own eyes to judge the effects of their decisions when
making a picture. A computer system that makes such pictures doesn't
have this luxury, and instead needs to proceed in a way that's
compatible with human visual perception and cognition.
This seminar will make a case that we already have enough
understanding of human visual perception and cognition to make good
progress here. We'll look at work in computer graphics and human
visual perception:
- Cartographic generalization
- Line drawings
- Detail modulation
- Exaggerated shading models
- Perception of materials
- Caricatures
- Stylized motion and "fake" physics
I'm open to discussing other displays, animations, interactions,
tasks, etc... as well, depending on the makeup of the class.
As for background, you should be comfortable with linear algebra and
calculus, and should have taken a course in either computer graphics
or computer vision (both aren't necessary).
Work
There will be weekly readings.
You'll be expected to lead the discussion once during the semester,
and there will be a course project/paper.
Audits are ok (email me), provided you participate regularly and lead
the discussion once.
Announcements
| Jan 16 |
With the
SIGGRAPH deadline approaching (Jan 26), I suspect many
of you (I know of at least five, not counting myself) strongly
prefer to skip the first two classes (Jan 18 and Jan 25).
So let's do that.
The first class is Feb 1. Please drop
me an email if you're planning on attending but haven't
registered.
Note: If you're still deciding on whether you want
to take this class, I will be there the first day for a
half hour (Jan 18; 2:50-3:20) to give a brief overview and
answer questions. Anything said there will be repeated on
Feb 1. Thanks for your understanding!
|
Schedule
| Feb 1 |
Introduction |
|
| Feb 8 |
1. Detail modulation and scale space |
Anthony |
| Feb 15 |
2. Caricature and `face space' |
Chan-su, Oncel |
| Feb 22 |
3. Map generalization |
Andre, Nicu |
| Mar 1 |
4. Ambiguity in perception: pictorial space |
Andre, Smriti |
| Mar 22 |
5. Exaggerated shading |
Shin, Xiaofeng |
| Mar 29 |
6. Line drawings |
Tim, Xiaofeng |
| Apr 5 |
7. Perception of materials |
Smriti, Oncel |
| Apr 12 |
8. Exaggerated Motion |
Chan-su, Nicu |
| Apr 19 |
9. Faking physics |
Shin, Tim |
| Apr 26 |
Project day |
|
Notes: I'm away March 8. March 15 is spring break.
The Photorealism exhibit at the Zimmerli.
Readings
(most materials only accessible within Rutgers)
- Detail modulation and scale-space
- Caricature and `face space'
-
The caricature generator,
S. Brennan,
Leonardo, 18, 170-178, 1985.
-
Example-Based Caricature Generation with Exaggeration,
L. Liang, H. Chen, Y. Xu, and H. Shum,
Pacific Conference on Computer Graphics and Applications 2002,
386-393.
-
Linear Object Classes and Image Synthesis from a Single
Example Image,
T. Vetter and T. Poggio, PAMI, 19(7), 733-742, 1997.
Optional reading:
-
Human Facial Illustrations: Creation and
Psychophysical Evaluation,
Bruce Gooch, Erik Reinhard, and Amy Gooch,
ACM TOG, 23(1), January 2004, 27-44.
-
Improved Automatic Caricature by Feature Normalization
and Exaggeration,
Z. Mo, J.P. Lewis, and U. Neumann,
SIGGRAPH 2003 Sketches and Applications.
-
The Fundamental Theorem of Linear Algebra,
Gilbert Strang,
American Mathematical Monthly, 100(9), 1993, 848-855.
(A great description of SVD)
- Map generalization
Optional reading:
----
- Ambiguity in perception: pictorial space
-
The visual perception of 3D shape,
James T. Todd, Trends in Cognitive Science 8(3), 115-121, 2004.
-
The Bas-Relief Ambiguity,
Peter N. Belhumeur, David J. Kriegman, and Alan L. Yuille,
IJCV 35(1), 1999, 33-44.
-
Ambiguity and the `mental eye' in pictorial relief,
J. J. Koenderink, A. J. van Doorn, A.M.L. Kappers, J.T. Todd,
Perception, 30, 431-448, 2001.
(In the news...)
- Exaggerated shading
-
Cartoon-Looking Rendering of 3D-Scenes,
Philippe Decaudin, INRIA Research Report #2919, June 1996.
(Video is
here.)
-
A Non-Photorealistic Lighting Model For Automatic
Technical Illustration,
Amy Gooch, Bruce Gooch, Peter Shirley, Elaine Cohen, SIGGRAPH 1998.
-
Hill shading and the reflectance map,
B.K.P. Horn, Proceedings of the IEEE, 69(1), 14-47, 1981.
Optional reading:
- Line drawings
-
Suggestive Contours for Conveying Shape,
Doug DeCarlo, Adam Finkelstein, Szymon Rusinkiewicz, and
Anthony Santella,
SIGGRAPH 2003, pp. 848-855.
(Code is
here.)
-
The shape of smooth objects and the way contours end,
J. J. Koenderink and A. J. van Doorn, Perception, 11, 129-137, 1982.
----
- Perception of materials
-
Real-world illumination and the perception of surface
reflectance properties,
Roland W. Fleming, R. O. Dror, and Edward H. Adelson,
Journal of Vision, 3(5), 347-368, 2003.
-
Perceiving Translucent Materials,
Roland W. Fleming, Henrik Wann Jensen, and Heinrich
H. Buelthoff,
First Symposium on Applied Perception in Graphics and
Visualization, August 2004.
- Exaggerated motion
-
Principles of traditional animation applied to
3D computer animation,
John Lasseter, SIGGRAPH 1987, 35-44.
(A web page
containing a summary of this article.)
-
Turning to the Masters: Motion Capturing Cartoons,
Chris Bregler, Lorie Loeb, Erika Chuang, Hrishi Deshpande,
SIGGRAPH 2002, 399-407.
(Video is
here).
-
Stylizing Motion with Drawings,
Y. Li, M. Gleicher, Y. Xu, and H. Shum,
Proceedings of 2003 Symposium on Computer Animation
- Faking physics
-
Faking Dynamics of Ropes and Springs,
Ronen Barzel, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 17(3),
31-39, 1997.
-
Sampling Plausible Solutions
to Multi-Body Constraint Problems,
Stephen Chenney and D. A. Forsyth, SIGGRAPH 2000.
(Examples are here.)
-
Simulating Cartoon Style Animation,
Stephen Chenney, Mark Pingel, Rob Iverson and Marcin Szymanski,
NPAR 2002, pp 133-138.