1 Correction to: The Visual Computer https://doi.org/10.1007/s00371-022-02457-7


Unfortunately there were some errors with figure citations in "6.1. Rendered scenes" and in legends of Fig. 11 and 12. Please find below the corrected sentences and figures legends:

The images presented in Fig. 11a–d were rendered considering a low level of human presence and activity. Accordingly, for the opacity film, we used α and β values equal to 2.4 and 0.8 dust elements per in2, respectively, while for the granularity mask, we used α and β values equal to 0.1 and 0 dust elements per in2, respectively. The images presented in Fig. 11e–h, on the other hand, were rendered considering a high level of human presence and activity.


The provided sequence of images shows the objects in an initial (“clean”) state (Fig. 13a), and after dust accumulation periods of 60 days (Fig. 13b) and 365 days (Fig. 13c).


Figure 11 Images of a dusty scene depicting dust accumulation over time in environments with low (top row) and high (bottom row) levels of human presence and activity. a and e: after 100 days of dust accumulation. b and f: after 200 days of dust accumulation. c and g: after 300 days of dust accumulation. d and h: after 400 days of dust accumulation.


Figure 12 Images of a dusty scene depicting dust accumulation over time considering distinct accumulation rates. a and e: initial state. b and f: after 5 days of dust accumulation. c and g: after 10 days of dust accumulation. d and h: after 100 days of dust accumulation. For the sequence in the top row, we employed a steeper accumulation rate during the first 5 days, and a lower rate during the remaining days. For the sequence in the bottom row, for comparison purposes, we employed the lower rate for all 20 days

The original article has been corrected.