“Toward evaluating lighting design interface paradigms for novice users” by Kerr and Pellacini

  • ©William B. Kerr and Fabio Pellacini




    Toward evaluating lighting design interface paradigms for novice users



    Lighting design is a complex but fundamental task in computer cinematography, involving the adjustment of light parameters to define final scene appearance. Many user interfaces have been proposed to simplify lighting design. They can be generally categorized in three paradigms: direct light parameter manipulation, indirect light feature manipulation (e.g., shadow dragging), and goal-based optimization of lighting through painting. To this date, no formal evaluation of the relative effectiveness of these paradigms has been performed.In this paper, we present a first step toward evaluating the benefits of these three paradigms in the form of a user study with a focus on novice users. 20 subjects participated in the experiment by performing various trials on simple scenes with up to 8 point lights, designed to test two lighting tasks: precise adjustment of lighting and the artistic exploration of lighting configurations. We collected objective and subjective data and found that subjects can light well with direct and indirect interfaces, preferring the latter. Paint-based goal specification was found to be significantly worse than the other paradigms, especially since users tend to sketch rather than accurately paint goal images, an input that painting algorithms were not designed for. We also found that given enough time, novices can perform relatively complex lighting tasks, unhindered by geometry or lighting complexity. Finally, we believe that our study will impact the design of future lighting interfaces and it will serve as the basis for designing additional experiments to reach a comprehensive evaluation of lighting interfaces.


    1. Adobe Systems Inc, 2009. Photoshop CS 4.Google Scholar
    2. An, X., and Pellacini, F. 2008. AppProp: all-pairs appearance-space edit propagation. ACM Transactions on Graphics 27, 3, 40:1–40:10. Google ScholarDigital Library
    3. Anrys, F., and Dutré, P. 2004. Image based lighting design. In 4th IASTED International Conference on Visualization, Imaging, and Image Processing.Google Scholar
    4. Autodesk Inc, 2008. Softimage xsi 7.Google Scholar
    5. Autodesk Inc, 2009. Maya 2009.Google Scholar
    6. Calahan, S. 1999. Storytelling through lighting, a computer graphics perspective. In Advanced RenderMan: Creating CGI for Motion Pictures, A. A. Apodaca, L. Gritz, and R. Barzel, Eds. Morgan Kaufmann, 223–233.Google Scholar
    7. Conner, B. D., Snibbe, S. S., Herndon, K. P., Robbins, D. C., Zeleznik, R. C., and van Dam, A. 1992. Three-dimensional widgets. In Proc. of the 1992 Symposium on Interactive 3D Graphics, 183–188. Google ScholarDigital Library
    8. Costa, A. C., Sousa, A. A., and Ferreira, F. N. 1999. Lighting design: A goal based approach using optimization. In Rendering Techniques ’99, 317–328. Google ScholarDigital Library
    9. Friedman, M. 1937. The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. Journal of the American Statistical Association 32, 200, 675–701.Google ScholarCross Ref
    10. Gleicher, M., and Witkin, A. 1992. Through-the-lens camera control. In Proceedings of SIGGRAPH ’92, 331–340. Google ScholarDigital Library
    11. Gumhold, S. 2002. Maximum entropy light source placement. In VIS ’02: Proceedings of the conference on Visualization ’02, 275–282. Google ScholarDigital Library
    12. Kawai, J. K., Painter, J. S., and Cohen, M. F. 1993. Radioptimization – goal based rendering. In Proceedings of SIGGRAPH ’93, 147–154. Google ScholarDigital Library
    13. Lee, C. H., Hao, X., and Varshney, A. 2004. Light collages: Lighting design for effective visualization. In VIS ’04: Proceedings of the conference on Visualization ’04, 281–288. Google ScholarDigital Library
    14. Marks, J., Andalman, B., Beardsley, P. A., Freeman, W., Gibson, S., Hodgins, J. K., Kang, T., Mirtich, B., Pfister, H., Ruml, W., Ryall, K., Seims, J., and Shieber, S. 1997. Design galleries: A general approach to setting parameters for computer graphics and animation. In Proceedings of SIGGRAPH ’97, 389–400. Google ScholarDigital Library
    15. Marks, J., Mirtich, B., Ratajczak, D., Ryall, K., Anderson, D., Anderson, D., Anderson, E., Anderson, E., Lesh, N., and Lesh, N. 2000. Human-guided simple search. In In Proc. of AAAI 2000, 209–216. Google ScholarDigital Library
    16. Mohan, A., Tumblin, J., Bodenheimer, B., Grimm, C., and Bailey, R. 2005. Table-top computed lighting for practical digital photography. In Rendering Techniques 2005: 16th Eurographics Workshop on Rendering, 165–172. Google ScholarDigital Library
    17. Okabe, M., Matsushita, Y., Shen, L., and Igarashi, T. 2007. Illumination brush: Interactive design of all-frequency lighting. 171–180.Google Scholar
    18. Patow, G., and Pueyo, X. 2003. A survey of inverse rendering problems. In Computer graphics forum, vol. 22, 663–687.Google Scholar
    19. Pellacini, F., and Lawrence, J. 2007. Appwand: Editing measured materials using appearance-driven optimization. ACM Transactions on Graphics 26, 3, 54:1–54:9. Google ScholarDigital Library
    20. Pellacini, F., Tole, P., and Greenberg, D. P. 2002. A user interface for interactive cinematic shadow design. ACM Transactions on Graphics 21, 3, 563–566. Google ScholarDigital Library
    21. Pellacini, F., Battaglia, F., Morley, R. K., and Finkelstein, A. 2007. Lighting with paint. ACM Transactions on Graphics 26, 2, 9:1–9:14. Google ScholarDigital Library
    22. Poulin, P., and Fournier, A. 1992. Lights from highlights and shadows. In SI3D ’92: Proceedings of the 1992 symposium on Interactive 3D graphics, 31–38. Google ScholarDigital Library
    23. Poulin, P., Ratib, K., and Jacques, M. 1997. Sketching shadows and highlights to position lights. In Proceedings of Computer Graphics International 97, 56–63. Google ScholarDigital Library
    24. Schoeneman, C., Dorsey, J., Smits, B., Arvo, J., and Greenberg, D. 1993. Painting with light. In Proceedings of SIGGRAPH ’93, 143–146. Google ScholarDigital Library
    25. Shacked, R., and Lischinski, D. 2001. Automatic lighting design using a perceptual quality metric. In Computer graphics forum, vol. 20, 215–227.Google Scholar
    26. Shesh, A., and Chen, B. 2007. Crayon lighting: sketch-guided illumination of models. In GRAPHITE ’07: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques in Australia and Southeast Asia, 95–102. Google ScholarDigital Library
    27. Stevens, J. P. 1996. Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences, third ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. Google ScholarDigital Library
    28. Vangorp, P., Laurijssen, J., and Dutré, P. 2007. The influence of shape on the perception of material reflectance. ACM Transactions on Graphics 26, 3, 77:1–77:9. Google ScholarDigital Library

ACM Digital Library Publication:

Overview Page: