Using a Graphics Turing Test to Evaluate the Effect of Frame Rate and Motion Blur on Telepresence of Animated Objects

A limited Graphics Turing Test is used to determine the frame rate that is required to achieve telepresence of an animated object. For low object velocities of 2.25 and 4.5 degrees of visual angle per second at 60 frames per second a rotating object with no added motion blur is able to pass the test. The results of the experiments confirm previous results in psychophysics and show that the Graphics Turing Test is a useful tool in computer graphics. Even with simulated motion blur, our Graphics Turing Test could not be passed with frame rates of 30 and 20 frames per second. Our results suggest that 60 frames per second (instead of 30 frames per second) should be considered the minimum frame rate to achieve object telepresence and that motion blur provides only limited benefits.

[1]  Harold E. Bedell,et al.  A target in real motion appears blurred in the absence of other proximal moving targets , 1995, Vision Research.

[2]  Donald P. Greenberg,et al.  An experimental evaluation of computer graphics imagery , 1986, TOGS.

[3]  R Efron,et al.  The relationship between the duration of a stimulus and the duration of a perception. , 1970, Neuropsychologia.

[4]  Jonathan Steuer,et al.  Defining virtual reality: dimensions determining telepresence , 1992 .

[5]  V. Lollo,et al.  Suppression of visible persistence as a function of spatial separation between inducing stimuli , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[6]  Mel Slater,et al.  Body Centred Interaction in Immersive Virtual Environments , 1994 .

[7]  Martin Kraus,et al.  Practical Implementation of a Graphics Turing Test , 2012, ISVC.

[8]  M. Georgeson,et al.  Motion blur and motion sharpening: temporal smear and local contrast non-linearity , 1998, Vision Research.

[9]  T. Poggio,et al.  Visual hyperacuity: spatiotemporal interpolation in human vision , 1981, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences.

[10]  Michael J. Singer,et al.  Measuring Presence in Virtual Environments: A Presence Questionnaire , 1998, Presence.

[11]  S. McKee,et al.  Statistical properties of forced-choice psychometric functions: Implications of probit analysis , 1985, Perception & psychophysics.

[12]  W. Lovegrove,et al.  The Effect of Spatial Frequency and Contrast on Visual Persistence , 1979, Perception.

[13]  Collin D. Brack,et al.  Human factors issues in the design of stereo-rendered photorealistic objects: a stereoscopic Turing test , 2010, Electronic Imaging.

[14]  S. Watamaniuk,et al.  Visible Persistence is Reduced by Fixed-Trajectory Motion but Not by Random Motion , 1992, Perception.

[15]  M. Morgan,et al.  Effects of motion on blur discrimination , 1994 .

[16]  Andrew B. Watson,et al.  Window of visibility: a psychophysical theory of fidelity in time-sampled visual motion displays , 1986 .

[17]  D. Burr.  Motion smear , 1980, Nature.

[18]  H. Barlow.  Temporal and spatial summation in human vision at different background intensities , 1958, The Journal of physiology.

[19]  Ann McNamara,et al.  Comparing Real & Synthetic Scenes using Human Judgements of Lightness , 2000, Rendering Techniques.

[20]  Michael Potmesil,et al.  Modeling motion blur in computer-generated images , 1983, SIGGRAPH.

[21]  Michael D. McGuigan.  Graphics Turing Test , 2006, ArXiv.