skip to main content
article
Free Access

Two methods for display of high contrast images

Published:01 January 1999Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

High contrast images are common in night scenes and other scenes that include dark shadows and bright light sources. These scenes are difficult to display because their contrasts greatly exceed the range of most display devices for images. As a result, the image constrasts are compressed or truncated, obscuring subtle textures and details. Humans view and understand high contrast scenes easily, “adapting” their visual response to avoid compression or truncation with no apparent loss of detail. By imitating some of these visual adaptation processes, we developed methods for the improved display of high-contrast images. The first builds a display image from several layers of lighting and surface properties. Only the lighting layers are compressed, drastically reducing contrast while preserving much of the image detail. This method is practical only for synthetic images where the layers can be retained from the rendering process. The second method interactively adjusts the displayed image to preserve local contrasts in a small “foveal” neighborhood. Unlike the first method, this technique is usable on any image and includes a new tone reproduction operator. Both methods use a sigmoid function for contrast compression. This function has no effect when applied to small signals but compresses large signals to fit within an asymptotic limit. We demonstrate the effectiveness of these approaches by comparing processed and unprocessed images.

References

  1. ADELSON, E.H. 1993. Perceptual organization and the judgment of brightness. Science 262, 2042-2044.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. AREND, L. 1994. Surface colors, illumination, and surface geometry: Intrinsic-image models of human color perception. In Lightness, Brightness, and Transparency, A. L. Gilchrist, Ed., Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 159-214.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. ASHDOWN, I. 1994. Radiosity: A Programmer's Perspective. Wiley, New York.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. BARROW, H. G. AND TENENBAUM, J. 1978. Recovering intrinsic scene characteristics from images. In Computer Vision Systems, A. R. Hanson and E. M. Riseman, Eds., Academic, San Diego, CA, 3-26.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. BLACKWELL, H. R. 1946. Contrast thresholds of the human eye. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 36, 11 (Nov.), 624-643.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. BURT, P. J. AND ADELSON, E.H. 1983. A multiresolution spline with application to image mosaics. ACM Trans. Graph. 2, 4 (Oct.), 217-236.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. CHIU, K., HERF, M., SHIRLEY, P., SWAMY, S., WANG, C., AND ZIMMERMAN, K. 1993. Spatially nonuniform scaling functions for high contrast images. In Proceedings of Graphics Interface '93 (May), 245-254.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. FERWERDA, J. A., PATTANAIK, S. N., SHIRLEY, P., AND GREENBERG, D. P. 1996. A model of visual adaptation for realistic image synthesis. In SIGGRAPH '96 Conference Proceedings, New Orleans, LA, August 4-9, Annual Conference Series, ACM SIGGRAPH: Addison Wesley, New York, 249-258.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. GILCHRIST, A. L. 1990. The perception of surface blacks and whites. In The Perceptual World, I. Rock, Ed., W. H. Freeman, New York, 63-78.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. GILCHRIST, A.L. 1994. Introduction: Absolute versus relative theories of lightness perception. In Lightness, Brightness, and Transparency, A. L. Gilchrist, Ed., Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1-34.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. GILCHRIST, A. L. AND JACOBSEN, A. 1984. Perception of lightness and illumination in a world of one reflectance. Perception 13, 5-19.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. HENNEMAN, R.H. 1935. A photometric study of the perception of object color. Arch. Psychol. 179, 5-89.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. HODGMAN, C. D., WEAST, R. C., AND SELBY, S. M., EDS. 1971. Handbook of Chemistry and Physics (42nd ed.). Chemical Rubber Publishing, Cleveland, OH, 2954-2955.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. HOOD, D. C. AND FINKELSTEIN, M.A. 1986. Sensitivity to light. In Handbook of Perception and Human Performance, Volume I: Sensory Processes and Perception, K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, and J. P. Thomas, Eds., Wiley, New York, Chapt. 5, 5.3-5.6.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. HUNT, R. W.G. 1975. The Reproduction of Colour (3rd ed.). Fountain Press, Kings Langley, 5-3 through 5-6. (5th edition available.)]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. JOBSON, D. J., RAHMAN, Z., AND WOODELL, G.A. 1997a. A multiscale retinex for bridging the gap between color images and the human observation of scenes. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 6, 7 (July), 965-976.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. JOBSON, D. J., RAHMAN, Z., AND WOODELL, G.A. 1997b. Properties and performance of a center/surround retinex. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 6, 3 (March), 451-462.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. KAUFMAN, L. 1986. Section I: Theory and methods, Overview: 10. Scaling. In Handbook of Perception and Human Performance. Volume I: Sensory Processes and Perception, K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, and J. P. Thomas, Eds., Wiley, New York, 1.55-1.66.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. KAWAI, J. K., PAINTER, J. S., AND COHEN, M.F. 1993. Radioptimization--goal based rendering. In SIGGRAPH '93 Conference Proceedings, Anaheim, CA, August 1-6, Annual Conference Series. ACM SIGGRAPH: Addison Wesley, New York, 147-154.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. NAKAMAE, E., KANEDA, K., OKAMOTO, T., AND NISHITA, T. 1990. A lighting model aiming at drive simulators. In SIGGRAPH '90 Conference Proceedings, Dallas, TX, August 6-10. Annual Conference Series. ACM SIGGRAPH: Addison Wesley, New York, 395-404.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. OPPENHEIM, A. V., SCHAFER, R. W., AND STOCKHAM, T. G. 1968. Nonlinear filtering of multiplied and convolved signals. Proc. IEEE 56, 8 (August), 1264-1291.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. RAHMAN, Z., JOBSON, D. J., AND WOODELL, G.A. 1996. Multi-scale retinex for color image enhancement. In Proceedings, International Conference on Image Processing, Lausanne, Switzerland, Sept. 16-19. Vol. 3, 1003-1006.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. RIPPS, H. AND WEALE, R.A. 1969. The visual stimulus. In The Eye (2nd ed.), Volume 2A: Visual function in Man: Part I: On Human Vision, H. Davson and L. T. Graham Jr., Eds., Academic, New York, 43-99.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. SCHLICK, C. 1995. Quantization techniques for visualization of high dynamic range pictures. In Photorealistic Rendering Techniques, Proceedings of the Fifth Eurographics Rendering Workshop, (Berlin, 13-15 June), G. Sakas, P. Shirley, and S. Mueller, Eds., 7-20.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. SCHUBERT, J. AND GILCHRIST, A.L. 1992. Relative luminance is not derived from absolute luminance. Investig. Opthalmol. Vis. Sci. 33, 4 (April), 1258.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. SHAPLEY, R. AND ENROTH-CUGELL, C. 1983. Visual adaptation and retinal gain controls. In Progress in Retinal Research, Volume 3, N. N. Osborne and G. J. Chader, Eds., Pergamon Press, Oxford, Chap. 9, 263-346, see p. 283.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. SPENCER, G., SHIRLEY, P., ZIMMERMAN, K., AND GREENBERG, D. P. 1995. Physically based glare effects for digital images. In SIGGRAPH '95 Conference Proceedings, Los Angeles, August 6-11. Annual Conference Series, ACM SIGGRAPH: Addison-Wesley, New York, 325-334.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. STEVENS, J. C. AND STEVENS, S.S. 1963. Brightness function: Effects of adaptation. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 53, 3 (March), 375-385.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. STEVENS, S.S. 1961. To honor Fechner and repeal his law. Science 133, 12 (Jan. 13), 80-86.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. STEVENS, S. S. AND STEVENS, J.C. 1960. Brightness function: Parametric effects of adaptation and contrast. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 50, 11 (Nov.) (Program of the 1960 Annual Meeting), 1139.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. STOCKHAM, T.G. 1972. Image processing in the context of a visual model. Proc. IEEE 60, 7 (July), 828-842.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. TANAKA, T. AND OHNISHI, N. 1997. Painting-like image emphasis based on human vision systems. In EUROGRAPHICS '97, Vol. 16(3), Budapest, Hungary, D. Fellner and L. Szirmay-Kalos, Eds., The Eurographics Association, C253-C260.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. TECHNICAL COMMITTEE 3.1, C. 1981. An Analytic Model for Describing the Influence of Lighting Parameters upon Visual Performance, Volume I: Technical Foundations. Commission Internationale de l'Eclairage (CIE).]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. TUMBLIN, g. AND RUSHMEIER, H. 1993. Tone reproduction for computer generated images. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 13, 6 (Nov.), 42-48.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. VAN ALLSBURG, C. 1984. The Mysteries of Harris Burdick. Houghton Mifflin, New York.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. WALRAVEN, J., ENROTH-CUGELL, C., HOOD, D. C., MACLEOD, D. A. I., AND SCHNAPF, J.L. 1990. The control of visual sensitivity: Receptoral and postreceptoral processes. In Visual Perception: The Neurophysiological Foundations, L. Spillmann and J. S. Werner, Eds., Chapt. 5, Academic, San Diego, CA, 53-101.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. WARD, G. 1991. Real pixels. In Graphics Gems//, J. Arvo, Ed., AP Professional, Cambridge, MA, Chapt. 11.5, 80-85.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. WARD, G. 1994a. A contrast-based scale factor for luminance display. In Graphics Gems IV, P. Heckbert, Ed., AP Professional, Cambridge, MA, Chapt. VII.2, 415-421.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. WARD, G. 1994b. The RADIANCE lighting simulation and rendering system. In SIGGRAPH '94 Conference Proceedings (Orlando, FL, 24-29 July). Annual Conference Series, ACM SIGGRAPH: Addison-Wesley. New York, 459-472.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. WARD LARSON, G., RUSHMEIER, H., AND PIATKO, C. 1997. A visibility matching tone reproduction operator for high dynamic range scenes. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 3, 4 (Oct.-Dec.), 291-306.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. WATKINS, C. AND COY, S. 1992. Photo-Realism and Ray Tracing in C. M & T Press. Also available in Essential Books on Graphics Programming. CD-ROM compilation, Dr. Dobb's J., Miller Freeman, San Francisco, CA, 1995.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Two methods for display of high contrast images

        Recommendations

        Reviews

        Shawn Neely

        The authors describe two contrasting methods (pun intended) for the display of images having a high dynamic range in brightness. The ratio of light intensity is formalized into a measure of contrast, and the authors address the problem of displaying high-contrast images on typical display devices such as CRT monitors. Much of the motivation comes from the amazing adaptive capabilities of the human visual system, which can easily adapt to huge ranges of brightness, even within a single scene. The paper covers previous research in this area, as well as some traditional techniques used by artists and photographers to capture the detail in a scene, both in the shadows and in the highlights. The first method described in depth involves decomposition of the scene into various lighting layers, such as glossy reflections, and is suitable for computer graphics rendering where this kind of layered information is available. The second method considered interactively adjusts portions of the displayed image in a local area corresponding to the point of interest directed at the fovea. The authors used a mouse cursor to indicate such a region of interest in the displayed image, but an automatic eye-tracking device could certainly be applied. Overall, the paper is well written but is intended for an expert audience. Readers should be familiar with some of the extensive references. The first method described could be applied to any static computer-generated image, viewed using video, film, or print media. The second method requires an interactive mechanism for use at a computer workstation. The results will likely be of interest to those who have previously considered the problem of how best to display images with both bright and dark detail.

        Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

        Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.

        Comments

        Login options

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

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image ACM Transactions on Graphics
          ACM Transactions on Graphics  Volume 18, Issue 1
          Jan. 1999
          94 pages
          ISSN:0730-0301
          EISSN:1557-7368
          DOI:10.1145/300776
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Copyright © 1999 ACM

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 1 January 1999
          Published in tog Volume 18, Issue 1

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • article

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader