Highlight shapes and perception of gloss for real and photographed objects.

Gloss perception strongly depends on the three-dimensional shape and the illumination of the object under consideration. In this study we investigated the influence of the spatial structure of the illumination on gloss perception. A diffuse light box in combination with differently shaped masks was used to produce a set of six simple and complex highlight shapes. The geometry of the simple highlight shapes was inspired by conventional artistic practice (e.g., ring flash for photography, window shape for painting and disk or square for cartoons). In the box we placed spherical stimuli that were painted in six degrees of glossiness. This resulted in a stimulus set of six highlight shapes and six gloss levels, a total of 36 stimuli. We performed three experiments of which two took place using digital photographs on a computer monitor and one with the real spheres in the light box. The observers had to perform a comparison task in which they chose which of two stimuli was glossiest and a rating task in which they rated the glossiness. The results show that, perhaps surprisingly, more complex highlight shapes were perceived to produce a less glossy appearance than simple highlight shapes such as a disk or square. These findings were confirmed for both viewing conditions, on a computer display and in a real setting. The results show that variations in the spatial structure of "rather simple" illumination of the "extended source" type highlight influences perceived glossiness.

[1]  Huib de Ridder,et al.  The visual light field in paintings of Museum Prinsenhof: comparing settings in empty space and on objects , 2015, Electronic Imaging.

[2]  Patrick Cavanagh,et al.  Perceiving Illumination Inconsistencies in Scenes , 2005, Perception.

[3]  Philip Dutré,et al.  The influence of shape on the perception of material reflectance , 2007, ACM Trans. Graph..

[4]  Diana Sommer Light Science And Magic An Introduction To Photographic Lighting , 2016 .

[5]  Hiroshi Ando,et al.  Effects of head motion and stereo viewing on perceived glossiness. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[6]  E. Adelson,et al.  Image statistics and the perception of surface qualities , 2007, Nature.

[7]  Paul Debevec Rendering synthetic objects into real scenes: bridging traditional and image-based graphics with global illumination and high dynamic range photography , 2008, SIGGRAPH Classes.

[8]  Barton L Anderson,et al.  Image statistics do not explain the perception of gloss and lightness. , 2009, Journal of vision.

[9]  J. Koenderink,et al.  Light Direction from Shad(ow)ed Random Gaussian Surfaces , 2004, Perception.

[10]  S. Hecht,et al.  THE INFLUENCE OF LIGHT ADAPTATION ON SUBSEQUENT DARK ADAPTATION OF THE EYE , 1937, The Journal of general physiology.

[11]  Alexander A. Mury,et al.  Light field constancy within natural scenes. , 2007, Applied optics.

[12]  A. Torralba,et al.  Specular reflections and the perception of shape. , 2004, Journal of vision.

[13]  E. Adelson,et al.  Accuracy and speed of material categorization in real-world images. , 2014, Journal of vision.

[14]  Roland W Fleming,et al.  Real-world illumination and the perception of surface reflectance properties. , 2003, Journal of vision.

[15]  Koos Eissen,et al.  Sketching: Drawing Techniques for Product Designers , 2009 .

[16]  Dragan Sekulovski,et al.  Relating physical and visual global light field structures , 2014 .

[17]  Huseyin Boyaci,et al.  Estimating the glossiness transfer function induced by illumination change and testing its transitivity. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[18]  Jan Koenderink,et al.  Multiple Visual Worlds , 2001, Perception.

[19]  J. Koenderink,et al.  Matching illumination of solid objects , 2007, Perception & psychophysics.

[20]  Maria Olkkonen,et al.  Perceived glossiness and lightness under real-world illumination. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[21]  H. Boyaci,et al.  Testing limits on matte surface color perception in three-dimensional scenes with complex light fields , 2007, Vision Research.

[22]  Jan J. Koenderink,et al.  Haptic perception disambiguates visual perception of 3D shape , 2009, Experimental Brain Research.

[23]  Jan J. Koenderink,et al.  Shape, Surface Roughness and Human Perception , 2008 .

[24]  G. Obein,et al.  Difference scaling of gloss: nonlinearity, binocularity, and constancy. , 2004, Journal of vision.

[25]  Barton L Anderson,et al.  The dark side of gloss , 2012, Nature Neuroscience.

[26]  M. Landy,et al.  Conjoint Measurement of Gloss and Surface Texture , 2008, Psychological science.

[27]  Peter Zolliker,et al.  Interaction improves perception of gloss. , 2013, Journal of vision.

[28]  James A. Ferwerda,et al.  Effects of Image Dynamic Range on Apparent Surface Gloss , 2009, CIC.

[29]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[30]  Ron O Dror,et al.  Statistical characterization of real-world illumination. , 2004, Journal of vision.

[31]  Andrea J. van Doorn,et al.  Texture, illumination, and material perception , 2015, Electronic Imaging.

[32]  Sylvia C Pont,et al.  Illusory gloss on Lambertian surfaces. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[33]  Sylvia C. Pont,et al.  A comparison of material and illumination discrimination performance for real rough, real smooth and computer generated smooth spheres , 2005, APGV '05.

[34]  D G Pelli,et al.  The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[35]  F. Thomas,et al.  The illusion of life : Disney animation , 1981 .

[36]  Alexander Danner,et al.  Comics: A Global History, 1968 to the Present , 2014 .

[37]  Donald P. Greenberg,et al.  Psychophysically based model of surface gloss perception , 2001, IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging.

[38]  Phillip J. Marlow,et al.  The Perception and Misperception of Specular Surface Reflectance , 2012, Current Biology.

[39]  Michael Pointer,et al.  Measurement of appearance , 2002, Other Conferences.

[40]  J. Koenderink,et al.  Photometric Invariants Related to Solid Shape , 1980 .

[41]  P. Mamassian Ambiguities and conventions in the perception of visual art , 2008, Vision Research.