Benchmarking non-photorealistic rendering of portraits

We present a set of images for helping NPR practitioners evaluate their image-based portrait stylisation algorithms. Using a standard set both facilitates comparisons with other methods and helps ensure that presented results are representative. We give two levels of difficulty, each consisting of 20 images selected systematically so as to provide good coverage of several possible portrait characteristics. We applied three existing portrait-specific stylisation algorithms, two general-purpose stylisation algorithms, and one general learning based stylisation algorithm to the first level of the benchmark, corresponding to the type of constrained images that have often been used in portrait-specific work. We found that the existing methods are generally effective on this new image set, demonstrating that level one of the benchmark is tractable; challenges remain at level two. Results revealed several advantages conferred by portrait-specific algorithms over general-purpose algorithms: portrait-specific algorithms can use domain-specific information to preserve key details such as eyes and to eliminate extraneous details, and they have more scope for semantically meaningful abstraction due to the underlying face model. Finally, we provide some thoughts on systematically extending the benchmark to higher levels of difficulty.

[1]  Ming Yang,et al.  DeepFace: Closing the Gap to Human-Level Performance in Face Verification , 2014, 2014 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[2]  Michael J. Lyons,et al.  Automatic Classification of Single Facial Images , 1999, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[3]  Hua Li,et al.  Contrast‐aware Halftoning , 2010, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[4]  Paul G. Kry,et al.  Stippling with aerial robots , 2016, Expressive.

[5]  Tobias Isenberg Evaluating and Validating Non-photorealistic and Illustrative Rendering , 2013, Image and Video-Based Artistic Stylisation.

[6]  Marwan Mattar,et al.  Labeled Faces in the Wild: A Database forStudying Face Recognition in Unconstrained Environments , 2008 .

[7]  Neil A. Thacker,et al.  Performance characterization in computer vision: A guide to best practices , 2008, Comput. Vis. Image Underst..

[8]  David Mould,et al.  Authorial subjective evaluation of non-photorealistic images , 2014, NPAR '14.

[9]  Aaron Hertzmann,et al.  Non-Photorealistic Rendering and the science of art , 2010, NPAR.

[10]  Robert M. Haralick,et al.  Performance Characterization in Computer Vision , 1993, BMVC.

[11]  Linda Doyle,et al.  Painting style transfer for head portraits using convolutional neural networks , 2016, ACM Trans. Graph..

[12]  Yu-Kun Lai,et al.  Non-photorealistic rendering of portraits , 2015, CAE '15.

[13]  Peter Hall,et al.  Don't Measure - Appreciate! NPR Seen Through the Prism of Art History , 2013, Image and Video-Based Artistic Stylisation.

[14]  Paul Haeberli,et al.  Paint by numbers: abstract image representations , 1990, SIGGRAPH.

[15]  Song-Chun Zhu,et al.  Abstract painting with interactive control of perceptual entropy , 2013, TAP.

[16]  David Salesin,et al.  Image Analogies , 2001, SIGGRAPH.

[17]  Chuan Li,et al.  Combining Markov Random Fields and Convolutional Neural Networks for Image Synthesis , 2016, 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[18]  Andy Harter,et al.  Parameterisation of a stochastic model for human face identification , 1994, Proceedings of 1994 IEEE Workshop on Applications of Computer Vision.

[19]  Manuel M. Oliveira,et al.  Domain transform for edge-aware image and video processing , 2011, SIGGRAPH 2011.

[20]  Yu-Kun Lai,et al.  Efficient Circular Thresholding , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[21]  Aaron Hertzmann,et al.  Painterly rendering with curved brush strokes of multiple sizes , 1998, SIGGRAPH.

[22]  Bruce Gooch,et al.  Image simplification and vectorization , 2011, NPAR '11.

[23]  Enrique G. Ortiz,et al.  Evaluating Open-Universe Face Identification on the Web , 2013, 2013 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops.

[24]  H. Leder,et al.  A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. , 2004, British journal of psychology.

[25]  Song-Chun Zhu,et al.  Sisley the abstract painter , 2010, NPAR.

[26]  Manuel J. Fonseca,et al.  Proceedings of the Joint Symposium on Computational Aesthetics and Sketch-Based Interfaces and Modeling and Non-Photorealistic Animation and Rendering , 2016 .

[27]  W. F. orstner Pros and Cons Against Performance Characterization of Vision Algorithms , 1996 .

[28]  Karen B. Schloss,et al.  Visual aesthetics and human preference. , 2013, Annual review of psychology.

[29]  Andrew Hunter,et al.  Learnable Stroke Models for Example-based Portrait Painting , 2013, BMVC.

[30]  Paul L. Rosin,et al.  A benchmark image set for evaluating stylization , 2016 .

[31]  Holger Winnemöller,et al.  XDoG: An eXtended difference-of-Gaussians compendium including advanced image stylization , 2012, Comput. Graph..

[32]  Hyeonjoon Moon,et al.  The FERET evaluation methodology for face-recognition algorithms , 1997, Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[33]  Hua Li,et al.  Structure-preserving stippling by priority-based error diffusion , 2011, Graphics Interface.

[34]  Hung-Kuo Chu,et al.  Tone‐ and Feature‐Aware Circular Scribble Art , 2015, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[35]  Susan E. Brennan,et al.  From the Leonardo Archive , 2007, Leonardo.

[36]  Simon Colton,et al.  Emotionally aware automated portrait painting , 2008, DIMEA.

[37]  Ariel Shamir,et al.  Style and abstraction in portrait sketching , 2013, ACM Trans. Graph..

[38]  Hongping Cai,et al.  Detecting People in Artwork with CNNs , 2016, ECCV Workshops.

[39]  Manuel Menezes de Oliveira Neto,et al.  Domain transform for edge-aware image and video processing , 2011, ACM Trans. Graph..

[40]  Robert M. Haralick Performance Characterization in Computer Vision , 1992, BMVC.