A Brush Stroke Synthesis Toolbox

Part of the Computational Imaging and Vision book series (CIVI, volume 42)


A core component of natural media painting is the generation of brush strokes that have expressive qualities similar to real brush strokes, and subsequently there are many different approaches that have been explored in the research community. As a brush stroke is a physical phenomenon consisting of many stiff bristles in sliding contact with a canvas, simulation has been a popular approach, considering mesh and spline based models and physical and data-driven dynamics. Because of the difficulty of high fidelity physical simulation, an alternative approach is to acquire the dynamic shape of real bristle brushes during strokes, and then playback those deformations directly, driven by user input. Regardless of whether simulation or acquisition is used, the result is a discrete set of instantaneous brush shapes, which then must be combined into a continuous brush stroke. Available options include stamping and sweeping, with both raster and vector output capabilities. At the end of this chapter, the reader will have in his or her toolbox all the necessary tools to tailor brush stroke generation to particular input, output, and performance requirements.


Collision Detection Triangle Mesh Spline Model Universal Joint Brush Stroke 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Abdel-Malek, K., Blackmore, D., Joy, K.: Swept volumes: foundations, perspectives, and applications. Int. J. Shape Model. 12(1), 87–127 (2006) zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adobe: Illustrator (2012).
  3. 3.
    Adobe: Photoshop (2012).
  4. 4.
    Armstrong, J.: Composite Bezier curves (2006).
  5. 5.
    Bai, B., Wong, K.W., Zhang, Y.: An efficient physically-based model for Chinese brush. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Frontiers in Algorithmics, pp. 261–270 (2007) Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baraff, D., Witkin, A.: Physically based modeling: Principles and practice. In: ACM SIGGRAPH Courses (1997). Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Baxter, W., Govindaraju, N.: Simple data-driven modeling of brushes. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on Interactive 3D Graphics and Games, pp. 135–142 (2010) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Baxter, W., Lin, M.: A versatile interactive 3D brush model. In: Proceedings of the Pacific Conference on Computer Graphics and Applications, pp. 319–328 (2004) Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Baxter, B., Scheib, V., Lin, M., Manocha, D.D.: Interactive haptic painting with 3D virtual brushes. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH, pp. 461–468 (2001) Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Beeson, C.: Animation in the “Dawn” demo. In: Fernando, R. (ed.) GPU Gems, pp. 223–233. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2004) Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Boeing, A.: Physics Abstraction Layer (2009).
  12. 12.
    Boeing, A., Bräunl, T.: Evaluation of real-time physics simulation systems. In: Proceedings of Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques in Australia and Southeast Asia, pp. 281–288 (2007) Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chu, S.H.: Making digital painting organic. Ph.D. thesis, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (2007) Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chu, N., Tai, C.L.: Real-time painting with an expressive virtual Chinese brush. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 24(5), 76–85 (2004) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chu, N., Baxter, W., Wei, L.Y., Govindaraju, N.: Detail-preserving paint modeling for 3D brushes. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Non-photorealistic Animation and Rendering, pp. 27–34 (2010) Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Corel: Painter (2012).
  17. 17.
    Coumans, E.: Bullet physics library (2010).
  18. 18.
    Design, A.: ArtRage (2012).
  19. 19.
    DiVerdi, S., Krishnaswamy, A., Hadap, S.: Industrial-strength painting with a virtual bristle brush. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, pp. 119–126 (2010) Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Eastman, P.: Art of illusion (2012).
  21. 21.
    Hertzmann, A.: A survey of stroke-based rendering. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 23, 70–81 (2003) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kavan, L., Sloan, P.P., O’Sullivan, C.: Fast and efficient skinning of animated meshes. Comput. Graph. Forum 29(2), 327–336 (2010) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lam, D.: Tokamak physics engine (2010).
  24. 24.
    Lewis, J.P., Cordner, M., Fong, N.: Pose space deformation: a unified approach to shape interpolation and skeleton-driven deformation. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH, pp. 165–172 (2000) Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lu, T.K., Huang, Z.: A GPU-based method for real-time simulation of Eastern painting. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques in Australia and Southeast Asia, pp. 111–118 (2007) Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mi, X., Xu, J., Tang, M., Dong, J.: The droplet virtual brush for Chinese calligraphic character modeling. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Applications of Computer Vision, pp. 330–334 (2002) Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Okabe, Y., Saito, S., Nakajima, M.: Paintbrush rendering of lines using HMMs. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques in Australasia and South East Asia, pp. 91–98 (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pudet, T.: Real time fitting of hand-sketched pressure brushstrokes. Comput. Graph. Forum 13(3), 205–220 (1994) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Saito, S., Nakajima, M.: 3D physics-based brush model for painting. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH Conference Abstracts and Applications, p. 226 (1999) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Smith, A.R.: Digital paint systems: an anecdotal and historical overview. IEEE Ann. Hist. Comput. 23, 4–30 (2001) MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Smith, R.: Open Dynamics Engine (2007).
  32. 32.
    Van Laerhoven, T., Van Reeth, F.: Brush up your painting skills: realistic brush design for interactive painting applications. Vis. Comput. 23(9), 763–771 (2007) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vandoren, P., Van Laerhoven, T., Claesen, L., Taelman, J., Raymaekers, C., Van Reeth, F.: IntuPaint: bridging the gap between physical and digital painting. In: IEEE International Workshop on Horizontal Interactive Human Computer Systems, pp. 65–72 (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Vandoren, P., Claesen, L., Van Laerhoven, T., Taelman, J., Van Reeth, F.: FluidPaint: an interactive digital painting system using real wet brushes. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Tabletops and Interactive Surfaces (2009) Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Xie, N., Laga, H., Saito, S., Nakajima, M.: IR2s: interactive real photo to Sumi-e. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Non-Photorealistic Animation and Rendering, pp. 63–71 (2010) Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Xu, S., Tang, M., Lau, F., Pan, Y.: Virtual hairy brush for painterly rendering. Graph. Models 66(5), 263–302 (2004) zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Adobe Systems Inc.San FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations