Recognizing real materials from their glossy appearance

Ged, Guillaume; Obein, Gaël; Silvestri, Zaccaria; Rohellec, Jean Le; Viénot, Françoise

doi:10.1167/10.9.18

Cited by 41 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recently, the demonstrated dichotomy among observers was also reported by Ged et al [5]. Rather than demonstrating it from the visual data, Ged et al asked observers to state their criterion for gloss evaluation.…”

Section: Observer Agreement: Derivation Of a Theoretic Observermentioning

confidence: 80%

“…The restriction of using flat black samples was inspired by the fact that in this situation, the front surface reflection is mainly responsible for the perceived highlights. Black samples therefore allow us to study the sensitivity of the visual system to luminance variations that are principally associated with surface reflection [5,10].…”

Section: B Samplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Together, diffuseness and contrast gloss seemed to describe what was captured by the embedding. Recently, Ged et al investigated whether gloss properties could be exploited as appearance attributes both to identify and to discriminate between real materials [5]. A principal component analysis (PCA) revealed that three components seemed to play a role in this discrimination process.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Overall gloss evaluation in the presence of multiple cues to surface glossiness

Leloup¹,

Pointer

Dutré

et al. 2012

J. Opt. Soc. Am. A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human observers use the information offered by various visual cues when evaluating the glossiness of a surface. Several studies have demonstrated the effect of each single cue to glossiness, but little has been reported on how multiple cues are integrated for the perception of surface gloss. This paper reports on a psychophysical study with real stimuli that are different regarding multiple visual gloss criteria. Four samples were presented to 15 observers under different conditions of illumination in a light booth, resulting in a series of 16 stimuli. Through pairwise comparisons, an overall gloss scale was derived, from which it could be concluded that both differences in the distinctness of the reflected image and differences in luminance affect gloss perception. However, an investigation of the observers' strategy to evaluate gloss indicated a dichotomy among observers. One group of observers used the distinctness-of-image as a principal cue to glossiness, while the second group evaluated gloss primarily from differences in luminance of both the specular highlight and the diffuse background. It could therefore be questioned whether surface gloss can be characterized with one single quantity, or that a set of quantities is necessary to describe the gloss differences between objects.

show abstract

Section: Observer Agreement: Derivation Of a Theoretic Observermentioning

confidence: 80%

Section: B Samplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Overall gloss evaluation in the presence of multiple cues to surface glossiness

Leloup¹,

Pointer

Dutré

et al. 2012

J. Opt. Soc. Am. A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…How is each modality's information processed and stored, and how is information exchanged and integrated between senses to form a common percept? Whereas a great deal of research has been conducted to investigate both uni-and bimodal shape perception, the perception of materials and material qualities has only recently received more attenfion in vision research (Buckingham et ai, 2009;Cant and Goodale, 2011;Fleming et al, 2003;Ged et al, 2010;Giesel and Gegenfurtner, 2010;Hiramatsu et al, 2011;Kim and Anderson, 2010;Liu et al, 2010;Motoyoshi, 2010;Motoyoshi et al, 2007;Olkkonen and Brainard, 2010;. In this study we want to shed light on the sensory interplay between the visual and the haptic spaces underlying material perception.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual and Haptic Representations of Material Properties

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on material perception has received an increasing amount of attention recently. Clearly, both the visual and the haptic sense play important roles in the perception of materials, yet it is still unclear how both senses compare in material perception tasks. Here, we set out to investigate the degree of correspondence between the visual and the haptic representations of different materials. We asked participants to both categorize and rate 84 different materials for several material properties. In the haptic case, participants were blindfolded and asked to assess the materials based on haptic exploration. In the visual condition, participants assessed the stimuli based on their visual impressions only. While categorization performance was less consistent in the haptic condition than in the visual one, ratings correlated highly between the visual and the haptic modality. PCA revealed that all material samples were similarly organized within the perceptual space in both modalities. Moreover, in both senses the first two principal components were dominated by hardness and roughness. These are two material features that are fundamental for the haptic sense. We conclude that although the haptic sense seems to be crucial for material perception, the information it can gather alone might not be quite fine-grained and rich enough for perfect material recognition.

show abstract

“…1217 Kentridge, Thomson, and Heywood (2012) (Fleming, 2014). 1444 It is evident that we can recognise the physical nature of objects 1445 from information available in the key features of the appearance of 1446 gloss (Fleming, Wiebel, & Gegenfurtner, 2013;Ged et al, 2010). 1447 There is collective agreement that the brain does not, and could …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The perception of gloss: A review

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gloss is a relatively little studied visual property of objects' surfaces. The earliest recorded scientific reference to gloss appears to have been by Ingersoll in 1921: studies at this time were based on the assumption that gloss could be understood as an inherent physical property of a surface, and the priority was to devise a satisfactory method and scale to measure it reliably. As awareness of the complexity of perception grew, efforts were made to distinguish different types of gloss, although these generally still took the form of a search for objective physical measures to be solved within the visual system by means of inverse optics. It became more widely recognised approximately 20 years ago that models of gloss perception based on inverse optics were intractable and failed to explain experimental findings adequately. A temporary decline in the number of published studies followed; however the last decade or so has seen a renewal of interest in the perception of gloss, in an effort to map what is now understood to be a complex interaction of variables including illumination, surface properties and observer. This appears to have been driven by a number of factors, as the study of gloss re-emerged from research into other surface properties such as colour and texture, with technological advances paving the way for new experimental techniques and measurements. This review describes the main strands of research, tracking the changes in approach and theory which have triggered new avenues of research, to the current state of knowledge.

show abstract

Recognizing real materials from their glossy appearance

Cited by 41 publications

References 32 publications

Overall gloss evaluation in the presence of multiple cues to surface glossiness

Overall gloss evaluation in the presence of multiple cues to surface glossiness

Visual and Haptic Representations of Material Properties

The perception of gloss: A review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About