Using a Graphics Turing Test to Evaluate the Effect of Frame Rate and Motion Blur on Telepresence of Animated Objects

M. Borg, S. S. Johansen, K. S. Krog, D. L. Thomsen, M. Kraus

Abstract

A limited Graphics Turing Test is used to determine the frame rate that is required to achieve telepresence of an animated object. For low object velocities of 2.25 and 4.5 degrees of visual angle per second at 60 frames per second a rotating object with no added motion blur is able to pass the test. The results of the experiments confirm previous results in psychophysics and show that the Graphics Turing Test is a useful tool in computer graphics. Even with simulated motion blur, our Graphics Turing Test could not be passed with frame rates of 30 and 20 frames per second. Our results suggest that 60 frames per second (instead of 30 frames per second) should be considered the minimum frame rate to achieve object telepresence and that motion blur provides only limited benefits.

References

  1. Barlow, H. B. (1958). Temporal and Spatial Summation in Human Vision at Different Background Intensities. J. Physiol., 141(2):337-350.
  2. Borg, M., Johansen, S., Thomsen, D., and Kraus, M. (2012). Practical Implementation of a Graphics Turing Test, volume 7432 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 305-313. Springer.
  3. Bowling, A., Lovegrove, W., and Mapperson, B. (1979). The Effect of Spatial Frequency and Contrast on Visual Persistence. Perception, 8(5):529 - 539.
  4. Brack, C. D., Clewlow, J. C., and Kessel, I. (2010). Human Factors Issues in the Design of Stereo-rendered Photorealistic Objects: A Stereoscopic Turing Test. In Proc. SPIE 7810, volume 7524.
  5. Burr, D. (1980). Motion Smear. Nature, 284:164-165.
  6. Chen, S., Bedell, H. E., and O g?men, H. (1995). A Target in Real Motion Appears Blurred in the Absence of Other Proximal Moving Targets. Vision Res., 35(6):2315- 2328.
  7. Di Lollo, V. and Hogben, J. H. (1987). Suppression of Visible Persistence as a Function of Spatial Separation Between Inducing Stimuli. Percept Psychphys., 41(4):345-354.
  8. Efron, R. (1970). The Relationship Between the Duration of a Stimulus and the Duration of a Perception. Neuropsychologia, 8(1):37-55.
  9. Fahle, M. and Poggio, T. (1981). Visual Hyperacuity: Spatiotemporal Interpolation in Human Vision. In Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Science, volume 213, pages 451-477. The Royal Society.
  10. Hammett, S. T., Georgeson, M. A., and Gorea, A. (1998). Motion Blur and Motion Sharpening: Temporal Smear and Local Contrast Non-Linearity. Vision Res., 38(14):2099-2108.
  11. McGuigan, M. D. (2006). Graphics Turing Test. CoRR, abs/cs/0603132. Informal publication.
  12. McKee, S. P., Klein, S. A., and Teller, D. Y. (1985). Statistical Properties of Forced-Choice Psychometric Functions: Implications of Probit Analysis. Perception & Psychophysics, 37(4):786-298.
  13. McNamara, A., Chalmers, A., Troscianko, T., and Gilchrist, I. (2000). Comparing Real & Synthetic Scenes using Human Judgements of Lightness. In Proceedings of the Eurographics Workshop on Rendering Techniques 2000, pages 207-218. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=647652.732122.
  14. Meyer, G. W., Rushmeier, H. E., Cohen, M. F., Greenberg, D. P., and Torrance, K. E. (1986). An Experimental Evaluation of Computer Graphics Imagery. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 5(1):30-50.
  15. Pääkkönen, A. K. and Morgan, M. J. (1994). Effects of Motion on Blur Discrimination. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A, 11(3):992-1002.
  16. Potmesil, M. (1983). Modeling Motion Blur in ComputerGenerated Images. Computer Graphics, 17:389-399.
  17. Slater, M. and Usoh, M. (1994). Body Centred Interaction in Immersive Virtual Environments. In Artificial Life and Virtual Reality, volume 1. http://web.cs.wpi.edu/~ gogo/hive/papers/Slater Presence 1994 Depth.pdf.
  18. Steuer, J. (1992). Defining Virtual Reality: Dimensions Determining Telepresence. Journal of Communication, 42(4):73-93.
  19. Turing, A. M. (1950). Computer Machinery and Intelligence. Mind, LIX(236).
  20. Watamaniuk, S. N. J. (1992). Visible Persistence is Reduced by Fixed-Trajectory Motion but not by Random Motion. Perception, 21(6):791 - 802.
  21. Watson, A. B., Ahumada, Jr., A. J., and Farell, J. E. (1986). Window of Visibility: A Psychophysical Theory of Fidelity in Time-Sampled Visual Motion Displays. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A., 3(3):300-307.
  22. Witmer, B. and Singer, M. (1998). Measuring Presence in Virtual Environments: A Presence Questionnaire. Presence, 7(3):225-240.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Borg M., Johansen S., S. Krog K., L. Thomsen D. and Kraus M. (2013). Using a Graphics Turing Test to Evaluate the Effect of Frame Rate and Motion Blur on Telepresence of Animated Objects . In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Graphics Theory and Applications and International Conference on Information Visualization Theory and Applications - Volume 1: GRAPP, (VISIGRAPP 2013) ISBN 978-989-8565-46-4, pages 283-287. DOI: 10.5220/0004211002830287


in Bibtex Style

@conference{grapp13,
author={M. Borg and S. S. Johansen and K. S. Krog and D. L. Thomsen and M. Kraus},
title={Using a Graphics Turing Test to Evaluate the Effect of Frame Rate and Motion Blur on Telepresence of Animated Objects},
booktitle={Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Graphics Theory and Applications and International Conference on Information Visualization Theory and Applications - Volume 1: GRAPP, (VISIGRAPP 2013)},
year={2013},
pages={283-287},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0004211002830287},
isbn={978-989-8565-46-4},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Graphics Theory and Applications and International Conference on Information Visualization Theory and Applications - Volume 1: GRAPP, (VISIGRAPP 2013)
TI - Using a Graphics Turing Test to Evaluate the Effect of Frame Rate and Motion Blur on Telepresence of Animated Objects
SN - 978-989-8565-46-4
AU - Borg M.
AU - Johansen S.
AU - S. Krog K.
AU - L. Thomsen D.
AU - Kraus M.
PY - 2013
SP - 283
EP - 287
DO - 10.5220/0004211002830287