Computer rendering and visual detection of orange peel

  • 204 Accesses

  • 9 Citations


The computer graphic simulation of a common spray painting artifact, called orange peel, is discussed. Orange peel distorts surface reflections and is commonplace in product design applications. The orange peel measurements from a standard industrial instrument are used to construct a height field, and this surface is rendered using traditional normal mapping techniques. Comparisons are made between real panels with orange peel and simulations of those panels. A simple visual model for detecting the presence of orange peel is also presented and evaluated. User testing of the model confirms that orange peel is more visible on dark paint colors than on light paint colors. The latter outcome suggests that to minimize application time, but still keep orange peel below visual threshold, paint application systems should be designed to take paint color into account.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Price includes VAT for USA

Subscribe to journal

Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.

US$ 99

This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12


  1. 1.

    Dorsey, J, Hanrahan, P, “Modeling and Rendering of Metallic Patinas.” SIGGRAPH: ACM SIGGRAPH 2005 Courses, p. 2, 2005

  2. 2.

    Dorsey, J, Hanrahan, P, “Modeling and Rendering of Metallic Patinas.” Proceedings of SIGGRAPH, pp. 387–396, 1999

  3. 3.

    Chang, Y, Shih, Z, “Physically-Based Patination for Underground Objects.” Comput. Graph. Forum, 19 109–117 (2000)

  4. 4.

    Dorsey, J, Edelman, A, Jensen, H, Legakis, J, Pedersen, H, “Modeling and Rendering of Weathered Stone.” Proceedings of SIGGRAPH, pp. 225–234, 1999

  5. 5.

    Cutler, B, Dorsey, J, McMillan, L, Muller, M, Jagnow, R, “A Procedural Approach to Authoring Solid Models.” Proceedings of SIGGRAPH, pp. 302–311, 2002

  6. 6.

    Paquette, E, Poulin, P, Drettakis, G, “Surface Aging by Impacts.” Proceedings of Graphics Interface, pp. 175–182, 2001

  7. 7.

    Merillou, S, Dischler, J, Ghazanfarpour, D, “Surface Scratches: Measuring, Modeling and Rendering.” Vis. Comput., 17, 30–45 (2001)

  8. 8.

    Bosch, C, Pueyo, X, Merillou, S, Ghasanfarpour, D, “A Physically Based Model for Rendering Realistic Scratches.” Comput. Graph. Forum, 23 361–370 (2004)

  9. 9.

    Paquette, E, Poulin, P, Drettakis, G, “The Simulation of Paint Cracking and Peeling.” Proceedings of Graphics Interface, pp. 59–68, 2002

  10. 10.

    Iben, H, O’Brien, J, “Generating Surface Crack Patterns.” Proceedings of SIGGRAPH, pp. 177–185, 2006

  11. 11.

    Hsu, S, Wong, T, “Simulating Dust Accumulation.” Comput. Graph. Appl., 15 18–22 (1995)

  12. 12.

    Kigle-Bockler, G, “Surface Quality Control on High and Medium Gloss Surfaces: Wave-Scan Dual.” 4th Wave-Scan User Meeting, 2006

  13. 13.

    Konieczny, J, “Application, Rendering and Display of Automotive Paint.” Ph.D. thesis, University of Minnesota, 2009

  14. 14.

    Ershov, S, Khodulev, A, Kochin, K, “Simulation of Sparkles in Metallic Paints.” Proceeding of Graphicon, pp. 121–128, 1999

  15. 15.

    Westlund, H, Meyer, G, “Applying Appearance Standards to Light Reflection Models.” Proceedings of SIGGRAPH, pp. 501–551, 2001

  16. 16.

    Dumont-Becle, P, Ferley, E, Kemeny, A, Michelin, S, Arqus, D, “Multi-Texturing Approach for Paint Appearance Simulation on Virtual Vehicles.” Proceedings of the Driving Simulation Conference, pp. 123–133, 2001

  17. 17.

    Daly, S, “The Visible Differences Predictor.” In: Watson, AB (ed.) Digital Images and Human Vision, pp. 179–206. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1993

  18. 18.

    Ward, G, “A Contrast-Based Scalefactor for Luminance Display.” In: Heckbert, PS (ed.) Graphics Gems IV, pp. 415–421. Academic Press, Boston, MA, 1994

  19. 19.

    Phong, B, “Illumination for Computer Generated Pictures.” Commun. ACM, 18 311–317 (1975)

  20. 20.

    Shimizu, C, Meyer, G, Wingard, J, “Interactive Goniochromatic Color Design.” Color Imaging Conference, pp. 16–22, 2003

  21. 21.

    Stover, J, Optical Scattering: Measurement and Analysis. SPIE Optical Engineering Press, 1995

  22. 22.

    Mastin, G, Watterberg, P, Mareda, J, “Fourier Synthesis of Ocean Scenes.” IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl., 7 16–23 (1987)

  23. 23.

    Gondek, J, “Fractal Landscape Synthesis in Computer Graphics.” B.S. thesis, University of Oregon, 1992

  24. 24.

    Blinn, J, “Simulation of Wrinkled Surfaces.” Proceedings of SIGGRAPH, pp. 286–292, 1978

  25. 25.

    Mannos, J, Sakrison, D, “The Effects of a Visual Fidelity Criterion on the Encoding of Images.” IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, 20 525–535 (1974)

Download references


The authors would like to thank Byk-Gardner for providing us with Wave-Scan data and documents. We would also like to thank Ford Motor Company for providing sample orange peel panels and photographs. This study was partially funded by NSF Grant IIP-0438693.

Author information

Correspondence to Gary Meyer.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (16287 KB)

Supplementary material 1 (16287 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Konieczny, J., Meyer, G. Computer rendering and visual detection of orange peel. J Coat Technol Res 9, 297–307 (2012) doi:10.1007/s11998-011-9378-2

Download citation


  • Orange peel
  • Computer graphics
  • Simulation
  • Measurement