ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
The assumed light direction for perceiving shape from shading
Full text PdfPdf (2.47 MB)
Source
Applied Perception in Graphics and Visualization archive
Proceedings of the 5th symposium on Applied perception in graphics and visualization table of contents
Los Angeles, California
SESSION: Lighting, shading, and textures table of contents
Pages 135-142  
Year of Publication: 2008
ISBN:978-1-59593-981-4
Authors
James P. O'Shea  University of California, Berkeley
Martin S. Banks  University of California, Berkeley
Maneesh Agrawala  University of California, Berkeley
Sponsor
SIGGRAPH: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 10,   Downloads (12 Months): 60,   Citation Count: 1
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1394281.1394306
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Recovering 3D shape from shading is an ill-posed problem that the visual system can solve only by making use of additional information such as the position of the light source. Previous research has shown that people tend to assume light is above and slightly to the left of the object [Sun and Perona 1998]. We present a study to investigate whether the visual system also assumes the angle between the light direction and the viewing direction. We conducted a shape perception experiment in which subjects estimated surface orientation on smooth, virtual 3D shapes displayed monocularly using local Lambertian shading without cast shadows. We varied the angle between the viewing direction and the light direction within a range +/- 66 deg (above/below), and subjects indicated local surface orientation by rotating a gauge figure to appear normal to the surface [Koenderink et al. 1992]. Observer settings were more accurate and precise when the light was positioned above rather than below the viewpoint. Additionally, errors were minimized when the angle between the light direction and the viewing direction was 20--30 deg. Measurements of surface slant and tilt error support this result. These findings confirm the light-from-above prior and provide evidence that the angle between the viewing direction and the light direction is assumed to be 20--30 deg above the viewpoint.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
Adams, W., Graf, E., and Ernst, M. 2004. Experience can change the light-from-above prior. Nature Neuroscience 7, 10, 1057--1058.
 
2
3
 
4
Champion, R. A., and Adams, W. J. 2007. Modification of the convexity prior but not the light-from-above prior in visual search with shaded objects. Journal of Vision 7, 13 (10), 1--10.
5
6
 
7
 
8
Hillis, J., Watt, S., Landy, M., and Banks, M. 2004. Slant from texture and disparity cues: Optimal cue combination. Journal of Vision 4, 12 (Dec.), 967--992.
 
9
Hoffman, D. M., Girshick, A. R., Akeley, K., and Banks, M. S. 2008. Vergenceaccommodation conflicts hinder visual performance and cause visual fatigue. Journal of Vision 8, 3 (3), 1--30.
 
10
Koenderink, J., van Doorn, A., and Kappers, A. 1992. Surface perception in pictures. Perception and Psychophysics 5, 52, 487--496.
 
11
Koenderink, J., van Doorn, A., and Christou, C. 1996. Perturbation study of shading in pictures. Perception 25, 1009--1026.
 
12
Langer, M., and Bulthoff, H. 2001. A prior for global convexity in local shape-from-shading. Perception 30, 403--410.
 
13
 
14
Mamassian, P., and Goutcher, R. 2001. Prior knowledge on the illumination position. Cognition 81, B1--B9.
 
15
Mamassian, P., and Kersten, D. 1995. Illumination, shading and the perception of local orientation. Vision Research 36, 15, 2351--2367.
 
16
17
18
 
19
20
 
21
Shacked, R., and Lischinski, D. 2001. Automatic lighting design using a perceptual quality metric. In EG 2001 Proceedings, vol. 20(3). 215--226.
 
22
Stevens, K. A. 1983. Slant-tilt: The visual encoding of surface orientation. Biological Cybernetics 46, 183--195.
 
23
Sun, J., and Perona, P. 1998. Where is the sun? Nature Neuroscience 1, 3 (July), 183--184.
 
24
Torrance, K. E., and Sparrow, E. M. 1967. Theory for the off-specular reflection from roughened surfaces. Journal of the Optical Society of America 57, 9, 1105--1144.
25
 
26
Watt, S. J., Akeley, K., Ernst, M. O., and Banks, M. S. 2005. Focus cues affect perceived depth. Journal of Vision 5, 10 (Dec.), 834--862.


Collaborative Colleagues:
James P. O'Shea: colleagues
Martin S. Banks: colleagues
Maneesh Agrawala: colleagues