skip to main content
10.1145/1186822.1073242acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessiggraphConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Evaluation of tone mapping operators using a High Dynamic Range display

Published:01 July 2005Publication History

ABSTRACT

Tone mapping operators are designed to reproduce visibility and the overall impression of brightness, contrast and color of the real world onto limited dynamic range displays and printers. Although many tone mapping operators have been published in recent years, no thorough psychophysical experiments have yet been undertaken to compare such operators against the real scenes they are purporting to depict. In this paper, we present the results of a series of psychophysical experiments to validate six frequently used tone mapping operators against linearly mapped High Dynamic Range (HDR) scenes displayed on a novel HDR device. Individual operators address the tone mapping issue using a variety of approaches and the goals of these techniques are often quite different from one another. Therefore, the purpose of this investigation was not simply to determine which is the "best" algorithm, but more generally to propose an experimental methodology to validate such operators and to determine the participants' impressions of the images produced compared to what is visible on a high contrast ratio display.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

pps030.mp4

mp4

42.5 MB

References

  1. David, H. A. 1969. The Method of Paired Comparisons. Charles Griffin and Company. London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Devlin, K., Chalmers, A., Wilkie, A., and Purgathofer, W. 2002. Star report on tone reproduction and physically based spectral rendering. In Eurographics 2002,Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Drago, F., Myszkowski, K., Annen, T., and Chiba, N. 2003. Adaptive logarithmic mapping for displaying high contrast scenes. In Proc. of EUROGRAPHICS 2003, P. Brunet and D. W. Fellner, Eds., vol. 22 of Computer Graphics Forum, 419--426.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Drago, F., Martens, W. L., Myszkowski, K., and Seidel, H.-P. 2003. Perceptual evaluation of tone mapping operators. In ACM SIGGRAPH Conference Abstracts and Applications. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Durand, F., and Dorsey, J. 2000. Interactive tone mapping. In Rendering Techniques 2000 (Proceedings of the Eleventh Eurographics Workshop on Rendering), B. Peroche and H. Rushmeier, Eds., 219--230. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Durand, F., and Dorsey, J. 2002. Fast bilateral filtering for the display of high-dynamic-range images. In In Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH '02, ACM Press, 257--266. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Fattal, R., Lischinski, D., and Werman, M. 2002. Gradient domain high dynamic range compression. In In Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH '02, ACM Press, 249--256. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Ferwerda, J. A., Pattanaik, S. N., Shirley, P., and Greenberg, D. P. 1996. A model of visual adaptation for realistic image synthesis. In In Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH '96, ACM Press, 249--258. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Johnson, G., and Fairchild, M. 2003. Rendering hdr images. In Proceedings of IS & T/SID 11th Color Imaging Conference, 36--41.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Kendall, M. G., and Babington-Smith, B. 1940. On the method of paired comparisons. Biometrika 31, 324--345.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Kendall, M. 1975. Rank Correlation Methods, 4th ed. Griffin Ltd.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Kuang, J., Yamaguchi, H., Johnson, G., and Fairchild, M. 2004. Testing hdr image rendering algorithms. In In proceedings of IS and T/SID 12th Color Imaging Conference.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Larson, G. W., Rushmeier, H., and Piatko, C. 1997. A visibility matching tone reproduction operator for high dynamic range scenes. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 3, 4, 291--306. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Ledda, P., Chalmers, A., and Seetzen, H. 2004. Hdr displays: a validation against reality. In IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Ledda, P., Chalmers, A., and Seetzen, H. 2004. A psychophysical validation of tone mapping operators using a high dynamic range display (poster). Symposium on Applied Perception in Graphics and Visualization. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Ledda. P., Santos, L. P., and Chalmers, A. 2004. A local model of eye adaptation for high dynamic range images. In In Proceedings of ACM AFRIGRAPH '04, ACM Press, 151--160. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Pattanaik, S. N., Ferwerda, J. A., Fairchild, M. D., and Greenberg, D. P. 1998. A multiscale model of adaptation and spatial vision for realistic image display. In In Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH '98, ACM Press, 287--298. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Pattanaik, S. N., Tumblin, J., Yee, H., and Greenberg, D. P. 2000. Time-dependent visual adaptation for fast realistic image display. In In Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH 2000, ACM Press, 47--54. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Pearson, E. S., and Hartley, H. O. 1988. Biometrika tables for statisticians, 3rd ed. Cambridge University Press, vol. 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Reinhard, E., Stark, M., Shirley, P., and Ferwerda, J. 2002. Photographic tone reproduction for digital images. In In Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH '02, ACM Press, 267--276. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Schlick, C. 1994. Quantization techniques for the visualization of high dynamic range pictures. In Eurographics Workshop on Rendering, 7--20.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Seetzen, H., Whitehead, L., and Ward, G. 2003. A high dynamic range display system using low and high resolution modulators. In Proc. of the 2003 Society for Information Display Symposium. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Siegel, S., and Castellan, N. 1988. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. McGrall-Hill International.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Thurstone, L. L. 1927. A law of comparative judgment. Psychological Review 34, 273--286.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Tumblin, J., and Rushmeier, H. 1993. Tone reproduction for computer generated images. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 13, 6, 42--48. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Tumblin, J., and Turk, G. 1999. LCIS: A boundary hierarchy for detail -preserving contrast reduction. In In Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH 99, A. Rockwood, Ed., 83--90. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Tumblin, J., Hodgins, J., and Guenter, B. 1999. Two methods for display of high contrast images. ACM Transactions on Graphics 18, 3, 56--94. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Upstill, S. D. 1985. The realistic presentation of synthetic images: image processing in computer graphics. PhD thesis. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Ward. G. 1994. A contrast-based scalefactor for luminance display. Graphics Gems IV., 415--421. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Yoshida, A., Blanz, V., Myszkowski, K., and Seidel, H.-P. 2005. Perceptual evaluation of tone mapping operators with real-world scenes. In SPIE.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Evaluation of tone mapping operators using a High Dynamic Range display

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        SIGGRAPH '05: ACM SIGGRAPH 2005 Papers
        July 2005
        826 pages
        ISBN:9781450378253
        DOI:10.1145/1186822
        • Editor:
        • Markus Gross

        Copyright © 2005 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 1 July 2005

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • Article

        Acceptance Rates

        SIGGRAPH '05 Paper Acceptance Rate98of461submissions,21%Overall Acceptance Rate1,822of8,601submissions,21%

        Upcoming Conference

        SIGGRAPH '24

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader