The Visual Computer

, Volume 9, Issue 3, pp 151–165 | Cite as

Visual cues and pictorial limitations for computer generated photorealistic images

  • Christopher G. Barbour
  • Gary W. Meyer
Original Article


The limitations of two-dimensional pictures as representations for reality are discussed. A review is made of the perceptual cues necessary to convey a sense of realism. These cues include, but are not limited to, binocular disparity, field of view, accommodation, vergence, and chromatic adaptation. Examples are given of how the physical characteristics of two-dimensional pictures limit the use of these cues in computer-graphic images. Techniques developed by artists and photographers to overcome some of these limitations are discussed.

Key words

Picture perception Realism Image synthesis Pictorial cues 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bartelson CJ, Breneman EJ (1967) Brightness reproduction in the photographic process. Photogr Sci Eng 11: 254–262Google Scholar
  2. Bartlett NR (1965) Dark adaptation and light adaptation. In: Graham CH, Bartlett NR, Brown JL, Hsia Y, Mueller CG, Riggs LA (eds) Vision and visual perception. John Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown JL, Mueller CG (1965) Brightness discrimination and brightness contrast. In: Graham CH, Bartlett NR, Brown JL, Hsia Y, Mueller CG, Riggs LA (eds) Vision and visual perception. John Wiley. New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Buchsbaum G (1980) A spatial processor model for object colour perception. J. Franklin Inst 310:1.Google Scholar
  5. Chung JC, Harris MR, Brooks FP, Fuchs H, Kelley MT, Hughes J, Ouh-young M, Cheung C, Holloway RL, Pique M (1989) Exploring virtual worlds with head-mounted displays, three-dimensional visualization and display technologies. In: Robbins, WE, Fisher SS (eds) Proc SPIE 1083: 42–52Google Scholar
  6. Cook RL, Porter T, Carpenter L (1984) Distributed ray tracing. Comput Graph 18:137–145Google Scholar
  7. Cutting JE (1986) Perception with an eye for motion. MIT Press. pp. 1–40Google Scholar
  8. Darley JM, Glucksberg S, Kinchla RA (1986) Psychology. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, p 86Google Scholar
  9. De Valois RL, De Valois KK (1988) Spatial vision. Oxford University Press, New York pp. 27–31Google Scholar
  10. D'Zmura M, Lennie P (1986) Mechanisms of color constancy. J Optic Soc Am [A] 3:1662–1672Google Scholar
  11. Evans RM (1948) An introduction to color. John Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Evans RM (1959) Eye, film and camera in color photography. John Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Foley JD, van Dam A, Feiner SK, Hughes JF (1990) Computer graphics: principles and practice. Addison-Wesley. MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  14. Gibson JJ (1982) Reasons for realism: selected essays of James J. Gibson, Reed E, Jones R (eds) Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Goldstein B (1984) Sensation and perception. Wadsworth, California, pp 203–287Google Scholar
  16. Gombrich EH (1956) Art and illusion. Princeton Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  17. Graham CH (1965) Visual space perception. In: Graham CH, Bartlett NR, Brown JL, Hsia Y, Mueller CG, Riggs LA (eds) Vision and visual perception John Wiley. New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Graham CH, Brown L (1965) Color contrast and color appearances: brightness constancy and color constancy. In: Graham CH, Bartlett NR, Brown JL, Hsia Y, Mueller CG, Riggs LA (eds) Vision and visual perception John Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Haber RN (1980a) How we perceive depth from flat pictures. Am Sci 68:370–380Google Scholar
  20. Haber RN (1980b) Perceiving space from pictures: a theoretical analysis. Hagen M (ed) In: The perception of pictures. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Hagen MA (1986) Varieties of realism: geometries of representational art. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Hagen MA (1991) How to make a visually realistic 3D display. Computer Graphics 25:76–81Google Scholar
  23. Hall R (1989) Illumination and color in computer generated imagery. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Hatada T, Sakata H, Kusak H (1980) Psychophysical analysis of the “sensation of reality” induced by a visual wide-field display. SMPTE J 89:560–569Google Scholar
  25. Helmholtz H von (1881) On the relation of optics to painting. In: Popular scientific lectures (translated by E Atkinson). Appleton, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Hochberg JE (1962) The psychophysics of pictorial perception. Audio-Visual Comm Rev 10:22–54Google Scholar
  27. Hochberg J (1978a) Art and perception. In: Carterette EC, Friedman MP (eds) Handbook of perception. vol. 10. Academic Press, New York, 10:225–259Google Scholar
  28. Hochberg JE (1978b) Perception (2nd edn). Prentice Hall, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Hochberg J (1979) Some of the things that paintings are. In: Nodine CF, Fisher DF (eds) Perception and pictorial representation. Plaeger, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Hochberg J (1980) Pictorial functions and perceptual structures. In: Hagen M (ed) The perception of pictures. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Jameson D, Hurvich LM (1972) Color adaptation: sensitivity, contrast, and afterimages. In: Jameson D, Hurvich LM (eds) Handbook of sensory physiology, (vol. 7, part 4). Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Langlands HMS (1926) Experiments in binocular vision. Trans Opt Soc (London) 28:45–82Google Scholar
  33. Livingstone M, Hubel H (1987) Psychophysical evidence for separate channels for the perception of form, color, movement, and depth. J Neurosci 7(11:3416–3468Google Scholar
  34. Livingstone M, Hubel H (1988) Segregation of form, color, movement and depth: anatomy, physiology, and perception. Science 240:740–749Google Scholar
  35. Maloney LT, Wandell A (1986) Color constancy: a method for recovering surface spectral reflectance. J Opt Soc Am [A] 3:29–33Google Scholar
  36. Mees GEK, James TH (1966) Theory of the photographic process (3rd edn). Macmillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  37. Meinel E (1973) Peripheral vision and painting. Br J Aesthetics 13(3):287–297Google Scholar
  38. Meyer GW (1989) Reproducing and synthesizing colour in computer graphics. Displays: technology and applications 10:161–170Google Scholar
  39. Meyer GW, Rushmeier HE, Cohen MF, Greenberg DP, Torrance KE (1986) An experimental evaluation of computer graphics imagery. ACM Trans Graph 5:30–50Google Scholar
  40. Mills MI (1985) Image synthesis, optical identity or pictorial communication. In: Magnenat-Thalmann N, Thalmann D (eds) Computer generated images, the state of the art, Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  41. Pirenne MH (1970) Optics painting and photography. Cambridge University Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  42. Pirenne MH (1975) Vision and art In: Carterette EC, Friedman MP (eds) Handbook of perception (vol. 5). Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  43. Potmesil M, Chakravarty I (1982) Synthetic image generation with a lens and aperture camera model. ACM Trans 1:85–108Google Scholar
  44. Riggs LA (1965) Light as a stimulus for vision. In: Graham CH, Bartlett NR, Brown JL, Hsia Y, Mueller CG, Riggs LA (eds) Vision and visual perception. John Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  45. Rock I (1975) An introduction to perception. Macmillan, New York, pp. 79–153Google Scholar
  46. Sedgwick H (1980) The geometry of spatial layout in pictorial representation. In: Hagen M (ed) The perception of pictures. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  47. Sekuler R, Blake R (1990) Perception. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  48. Smith OW, Gruber H (1958) Perception of depth in photographs. Am J Psych 8:307–313Google Scholar
  49. Stone J (1987) A user's guide to the view camera. Little Brown, BostonGoogle Scholar
  50. Swenson HA (1932) The relative influence of accommodation and convergence in the judgement of distance. J G Psych 7:360–380Google Scholar
  51. Upton BL, Upton J (1981) Photography. Little Brown, BostonGoogle Scholar
  52. Van de Grind WA (1986) Vision and the graphical simulation of spatial structure. Proc ACM Interactive 3D Graphics, pp 197–235Google Scholar
  53. Westerink JHDM, Roufs JAJ (1989) Subjective image quality as a function of viewing distance, resolution, and picture size. SMPTE J 98(2):113–119Google Scholar
  54. Witkin HA (1959) The perception of the upright. Sci Am 200(2):50–56Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher G. Barbour
    • 1
  • Gary W. Meyer
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of OregonEugeneUSA
  2. 2.Department of Computer and Information ScienceUniversity of OregonEugeneUSA

Personalised recommendations