A Study of Opacity Ranges for Transparent Overlays in 3D Landscapes

{When visualizing data in a realistically rendered 3D virtual environment, it is often important to represent not only the 3D scene but also overlaid information about additional, abstract data. These overlays must be usefully visible, i.e. be readable enough to convey the information they represent, but remain unobtrusive to avoid cluttering the view. We take a step toward establishing guidelines for designing such overlays by studying the relationship between three different patterns (filled, striped and dotted patterns), two pattern densities, the presence or not of a solid outline, two types of background (blank and with trees), and the opacity of the overlay. For each combination of factors, participants set the faintest and the strongest acceptable opacity values. Results from this first study suggest that i) ranges of acceptable opacities are around 20-70%, that ii) ranges can be extended by 5% by using an outline, and that iii) ranges shift based on features like pattern and density.

[1]  W. Cleveland,et al.  Graphical Perception: Theory, Experimentation, and Application to the Development of Graphical Methods , 1984 .

[2]  Kai Lawonn,et al.  A Survey of Surface‐Based Illustrative Rendering for Visualization , 2018, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[3]  Elaine Cohen,et al.  A non-photorealistic lighting model for automatic technical illustration , 1998, SIGGRAPH.

[4]  F Schröder,et al.  Meteorology meets computer graphics - a look at a wide range of weather visualisations for diverse audiences , 2000, Comput. Graph..

[5]  D R Proffitt,et al.  Visual learning in the perception of texture: simple and contingent aftereffects of texture density. , 1996, Spatial vision.

[6]  M. Sheelagh T. Carpendale,et al.  Visualization of Uncertainty in Lattices to Support Decision-Making , 2007, EuroVis.

[7]  J. McGrath.  Methodology matters: doing research in the behavioral and social sciences , 1995 .

[8]  Derek Shanahan,et al.  Geographic Visualization: Concepts, Tools and Applications , 2009 .

[9]  Colin Ware,et al.  View Direction, Surface Orientation and Texture Orientation for Perception of Surface Shape , 2004, Graphics Interface.

[10]  Carl Gutwin,et al.  A Baseline Study of Emphasis Effects in Information Visualization , 2020, Graphics Interface.

[11]  Mercer Jennifer Ann,et al.  PUBLICATION manual of the American Psychological Association. , 1952, Psychological bulletin.

[12]  Victoria Interrante,et al.  Illustrating transparent surfaces with curvature-directed strokes , 1996, Proceedings of Seventh Annual IEEE Visualization '96.

[13]  M. D'Zmura,et al.  Color Transparency , 1997, Perception.

[14]  Kai Lawonn,et al.  A Survey on Multimodal Medical Data Visualization , 2018, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[15]  Martin Krzywinski,et al.  Points of Significance: Error bars , 2013, Nature Methods.

[16]  Kai Lawonn,et al.  Feature Lines for Illustrating Medical Surface Models: Mathematical Background and Survey , 2015, Visualization in Medicine and Life Sciences III.

[17]  Tamara Munzner,et al.  Visualization Analysis and Design , 2014, A.K. Peters visualization series.

[18]  Maureen C. Stone,et al.  Whisper, Don't Scream: Grids and Transparency , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[19]  G. Cumming,et al.  Inference by eye: confidence intervals and how to read pictures of data. , 2005, The American psychologist.

[20]  Sandro Wartzack,et al.  Shaping the digital twin for design and production engineering , 2017 .

[21]  Tobias Isenberg,et al.  A survey of digital stippling , 2017, Comput. Graph..

[22]  B M Hughes.  Just Noticeable Differences in 2D and 3D Bar Charts: A Psychophysical Analysis of Chart Readability , 2001, Perceptual and motor skills.

[23]  F Metelli,et al.  The perception of transparency. , 1974, Scientific American.