Selective quality rendering by exploiting human inattentional blindness: looking but not seeing

ABSTRACT

There are two major influences on human visual attention: bottom-up and top-down processing. Bottom-up processing is the automatic direction of gaze to lively or colourful objects as determined by low-level vision. In contrast, top-down processing is consciously directed attention in the pursuit of predetermined goals or tasks. Previous work in perception-based rendering has exploited bottom-up visual attention to control detail (and therefore time) spent on rendering parts of a scene. In this paper, we demonstrate the principle of Inattentional Blindness, a major side effect of top-down processing, where portions of the scene unrelated to the specific task go unnoticed. In our experiment, we showed a pair of animations rendered at different quality levels to 160 subjects, and then asked if they noticed a change. We instructed half the subjects to simply watch our animation, while the other half performed a specific task during the animation.When parts of the scene, outside the focus of this task, were rendered at lower quality, almost none of the task-directed subjects noticed, whereas the difference was clearly visible to the control group. Our results clearly show that top-down visual processing can be exploited to reduce rendering times substantially without compromising perceived visual quality in interactive tasks.

References

1. BOLIN MR. AND MEYER GW. 1998 A Perceptually Based Adaptive Sampling Algorithm, In Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 1998, ACM Press/ACM SIGGRAPH, New York. M. Cohen, Ed., Computer Graphics Proceedings, Annual Conference Series, ACM, 299--309.
2. MACK A. AND ROCK I. 1998 Inattentional Blindness, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
3. JAMES W. 1890 Principles of Psychology, New York: Holt.
4. DOWLING JE. 1987 The retina: An approachable part of the brain, Cambridge: Belknap.
5. YARBUS AL.1967 Eye movements during perception of complex objects. In L. A. Riggs, Ed., Eye Movements and Vision, Plenum Press, New York, Chapter VII, 171--196.
6. PALMER SE. 1999 Vision Science- Photons to Phenomenology. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
7. FERWERDA J., PATTANAIK SN, SHIRLEY P. AND GREENBERG DP. 1996 A Model of Visual Adaptation for Realistic Image Synthesis, In Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 1996, ACM Press / ACM SIGGRAPH, New York. H. Rushmeier, Ed., Computer Graphics Proceedings, Annual Conference Series, ACM, 249--258.
8. GREENBERG DP, TORRANCE KE, SHIRLEY P., ARVO J., FERWERDA J., PATTANAIK SN. LAFORTUNE E., WALTER B., FOO S-C. AND TRUMBORE B. 1997 A Framework for Realistic Image Synthesis, In Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 1997 (Special Session), ACM Press / ACM SIGGRAPH, New York. T. Whitted, Ed., Computer Graphics Proceedings, Annual Conference Series, ACM, 477--494.
9. MCNAMARA A., CHALMERS AG, TROSCIANKO T., AND GILCHRIST I. 2000 Comparing Real and Synthetic Scenes using Human Judgements of Lightness. In B Peroche and H Rushmeier (eds), 12th Eurographics Workshop on Rendering, 207--219.
10. MYSZKOWSKI K., TAWARA T., AKAMINE H. AND SEIDEL H-P. 2001 Perception-Guided Global Illumination Solution for Animation Rendering. In Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 2001, ACM Press/ACM SIGGRAPH, New York. E. Fiume, Ed., Computer Graphics Proceedings, Annual ConferenceSeries, ACM, 221--230.
11. PATTANAIK SN, FERWERDA J, FAIRCHILD MD, AND GREENBERG DP. 1998 A Multiscale Model of Adaptation and Spatial Vision for Realistic Image Display, in Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 1998, ACM Press/ACM SIGGRAPH, New York. M. Cohen, Ed., Computer Graphics Proceedings, Annual Conference Series, ACM, 287--298.
12. RAMASUBRAMANIAN M., PATTANAIK SN, GREENBERG DP. 1999 A Perceptually Based Physical Error Metric for Realistic Image Synthesis, In Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 1999, ACM Press/ACM SIGGRAPH, New York. Computer A. Rockwood, Ed., Graphics Proceedings, Annual Conference Series, ACM, 73--82.
13. LUEBKE D. AND HALLEN B. 2001 Perceptually driven simplification for interactive rendering, In Proceedings of 12th Eurographics Workshop on Rendering, 221--223.
14. LUEBKE D., REDDY M., WATSON B., COHEN J. AND VARSHNEY A. 2001. Advanced Issues in Level of Detail. Course #41 at SIGGRAPH 2001. Los Angeles, CA. August 12--17, 2001.
15. REDDY M. 1997. Perceptually Modulated Level of Detail for Virtual Environments. Ph.D. Thesis (CST- 134-97), University of Edinburgh.
16. MACIEL PWC. AND SHIRLEY P. 1995 Visual Navigation of Large Environments Using Textured Clusters, In Proceedings of Symposium on Interactive 3D Graphics, 95--102.
17. WATSON, B., FRIEDMAN, A. AND MCGAFFEY, A. 1997 An evaluation of Level of Detail Degradation in Head-Mounted Display Peripheries. Presence, 6, 6, 630--637.
18. WATSON B., FRIEDMAN A. AND MCGAFFEY A 2001 Measuring and Predicting Visual Fidelity, In Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 2001, ACM Press/ACM SIGGRAPH, New York. E. Fiume, Ed., Computer Graphics Proceedings, Annual Conference Series, ACM, 213--220.
19. MCCONKIE GW. AND LOSCHKY LC. 1997 Human Performance with a Gaze-Linked Multi-Resolutional Display. ARL Federated Laboratory Advanced Displays and Interactive Displays Consortium, Advanced Displays and Interactive Displays First Annual Symposium, 25--34.
20. LOSCHKY LC. AND MCCONKIE GW. 1999 Gaze Contingent Displays: Maximizing Display Bandwidth Efficiency. ARL Federated Laboratory Advanced Displays and Interactive Displays Consortium, Advanced Displays and Interactive Displays Third Annual Symposium, 79--83.
21. LOSCHKY LC, MCCONKIE GW, YANG, J AND MILLER ME. 2001 Perceptual Effects of a Gaze-Contingent Multi-Resolution Display Based on a Model of Visual Sensitivity. In the ARL Federated Laboratory 5th Annual Symposium - ADID Consortium Proceedings, 53--58.
22. YEE H. 2000 Spatiotemporal sensitivity and visual attention for efficient rendering of dynamic environments, MSc. Thesis, Program of Computer Graphics, Cornell University.
23. YEE H., PATTANAIK, S., AND GREENBERG, DP. 2001 Spatiotemporal sensitivity and Visual Attention for efficient rendering of dynamic Environments, In ACM Transactions on Computer Graphics, vol. 20, no 1, 39--65.
24. DALY S. 1998 Engineering observations from spatiovelocity and spatiotemporal visual models. In IS&T/SPIE Conference on Human Vision and Electronic Imaging III, SPIE vol. 3299, 152--166.
25. ITTI L. AND KOCH C. 2000 A saliency-based search mechanism for overt and covert shifts of visual attention, In Vision Research, vol. 40, no 10--12, 1489--1506.
26. YANTIS S. 1996 Attentional capture in vision. In A. Kramer, M. Coles and G. Logan (eds), Converging operations in the study of selective visual attention, 45--76, American Psychological Association.
27. CATER K., CHALMERS AG. AND DALTON C. 2001 Change blindness with varying rendering fidelity: looking but not seeing, Sketch SIGGRAPH 2001, Conference Abstracts and Applications.
28. O.REGAN JK, DEUBEL H., CLARK JJ. AND RENSINK RA. 2000 Picture changes during blinks: looking without seeing and seeing without looking. Visual Cognition.7, 1, 191--212.

Index Terms

• Computing methodologies

  • Artificial intelligence

    • Computer vision

      • Computer vision problems

        • Video segmentation

      • Computer vision tasks

        • Scene understanding

  • Computer graphics

    • Animation

    • Image manipulation

    • Rendering