ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Evaluation of methods for approximating shapes used to synthesize 3D solid textures
Full text PdfPdf (1.04 MB)
Source
ACM Transactions on Applied Perception (TAP) archive
Volume 4 ,  Issue 4  (January 2008) table of contents
Article No. 5  
Year of Publication: 2008
ISSN:1544-3558
Authors
Robert Jagnow  MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts
Julie Dorsey  Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
Holly Rushmeier  Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 6,   Downloads (12 Months): 101,   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/10.1145/1278760.1278765
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

In modern computer graphics applications, textures play an important role in conveying the appearance of real-world materials. But while surface appearance can often be effectively captured with a photograph, it is difficult to use example imagery to synthesize fully three-dimensional (3D) solid textures that are perceptually similar to their inputs. Specifically, this research focuses on human perception of 3D solid textures composed of aggregate particles in a binding matrix. Holding constant an established algorithm for approximating particle distributions, we examine the problem of estimating particle shape. We consider four methods for approximating plausible particle shapes—including two methods of our own contribution. We compare the performance of these methods under a variety of input conditions using automated, perceptually motivated metrics, as well as a psychophysical experiment. In the course of assessing the relative performance of the four algorithms, we also evaluate the reliability of the automated metrics in predicting the results of the experiment.


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
 
2
Ben-Shahar, O., Huggins, P., Izo, T., and Zucker, S. 2003. Cotrical connections and early visual function: Intra- and inter-columnar processing. Journal of Physiology--Paris 97, 2--3, 191--208.
 
3
Binford, T. 1971. Visual perception by computer. In Proceedings, IEEE Conference on Systems Science and Cybernetics.
 
4
 
5
 
6
Dobbins, A., Zucker, S. W., and Cynader, M. S. 1987. Endstopped neurons in the visual cortex as a substrate for calculating curvature. Nature 329, 6138 (Oct.), 438--441.
 
7
 
8
Edvardson, H. and Smedby, O. 2002. Compact and efficient 3D shape description through radial function approximation. In Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine. Vol. 72. 89--97.
9
 
10
11
 
12
Gardner, R. J., Hobolth, A., Jensen, E. B. V., and Sørensen, F. B. 2005. Shape discrimination by total curvature, with a view to cancer diagnostics. Journal of Microscopy 217, 1, 49--59.
 
13
Ghazanfarpour, D. and Dischler, J.-M. 1996. Generation of 3D texture using multiple 2D models analysis. Computer Graphics Forum, Proceedings of Eurographics 1996 15, 3, 311--324.
 
14
Gorla, G., Interrante, V., and Sapiro, G. 2001. Growing fitted textures. ACM SIGGRAPH 2001 Sketches and Applications.
 
15
Gurnsey, R. and Fleet, D. J. 2001. Texture space. Vision Research 41, 3, 745--757.
 
16
Hagwood, C. 1990. A mathematical treatment of the spherical stereology. NISTIR 4370, 1--17.
17
 
18
Hobolth, A. 2003. The spherical deformation model. Biostatistics 4, 4, 583--595.
 
19
Hobolth, A. and Jensen, E. B. V. 2002. Stereological analysis of shape. Image Analysis and Stereology 21, Suppl. 1, S23--S29.
 
20
21
 
22
Keiding, N. and Jensen, S. T. 1972. Maximum likelihood estimation of the size distribution of liver cell nuclei from the observed distribution in a plane section. Biometrics 28, 3 (Sept.), 813--829.
23
24
 
25
Lefebvre, L. and Poulin, P. 2000. Analysis and synthesis of structural textures. In Graphics Interface 2000. 77--86.
 
26
Li, Q., Li, F., Shiraishi, J., Katsuragawa, S., Sone, S., and Doi, K. 2003. Investigation of new psychophysical measures for evaluation of similar images on thoracic computed tomography for distinction between benign and malignant nodules. Medical Physics 30, 10 (Oct.), 2584--2593.
 
27
Loncaric, S. 1998. A survey of shape analysis techniques. Pattern Recognition 31, 8, 983--1001.
 
28
Marr, D. and Nishihara, H. K. 1978. Representation and recognition of the spatial organization of three dimensional shapes. In Proceedings of the Royal Society. Vol. B200. 269--294.
 
29
Martens, W. L. and Myszkowski, K. 1998. Psychophysical validation of the visible differences predictor for global illumination applications. In Proceedings of IEEE Visualization '98. 49--52.
 
30
Martin, W. N. and Aggarwal, J. K. 1983. Volumetric descriptions of objects from multiple views. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence PAMI-5, 2, 150--158.
 
31
 
32
33
 
34
 
35
Or, Y. H. and Zucker, S. 1989. Texture fields and texture flows: Sensitivity to differences. Spatial Vision 4, 2--3, 131--139.
36
 
37
38
 
39
Rushmeier, H. E., Rogowitz, B. E., and Piatko, C. 2000. Perceptual issues in substituting texture for geometry. In Human Vision and Electronic Imaging V. Vol. 3959. 372--383.
 
40
Scassellati, B., Alexopoulos, S., and Flickner, M. 1994. Retrieving images by 2D shape: A comparison of computation methods with human perceptual judgments. In Storage and Retrieval for Image and Video Databases (SPIE). Vol. 2185. 2--14.
41
42
 
43
Underwood, E. E. 1970. Quantitative Stereology. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
 
44
45
46
47
48
 
49
Weistrand, O. 2001. Shape approximation of starshaped discrete objects. In SCIA01. O--M4B.
50


Collaborative Colleagues:
Robert Jagnow: colleagues
Julie Dorsey: colleagues
Holly Rushmeier: colleagues