skip to main content
10.1145/3305366.3328101acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessiggraphConference Proceedingsconference-collections
course

Perception of virtual characters

Published:28 July 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

This course will introduce students, researchers and digital artists to the recent results in perceptual research on virtual characters. It covers both how technical and artistic aspects that constitute the appearance of a virtual character influence human perception. We will report results of studies that addressed the influence of low-level cues like facial proportions, shading or level of detail and higher-level cues such as behavior or artistic stylization. We will place emphasis on aspects that are encountered during character development, animation, and achieving consistency between the visuals and storytelling. The insights that we present in this course will serve as an additional toolset to anticipate the effect of certain design decisions and to create more convincing characters, especially in the case where budgets or time are limited.

References

  1. Sun Joo Ahn and Jeremy N. Bailenson. 2011. Self-endorsing versus other-endorsing in virtual environments: The effect on brand preference. Journal of Advertising (2011), 10--2753.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Thomas R. Alley and Michael R. Cunningham. 1991. Averaged faces are attractive, but very attractive faces are not average. Psychological Science 2, 2 (1991), 123--125.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Anthony P Atkinson, Winand H Dittrich, Andrew J Gemmell, Andrew W Young, et al. 2004. Emotion perception from dynamic and static body expressions in point-light and full-light displays. Perception 33, 6 (2004), 717--746.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Laura Aymerich-Franch, René F. Kizilcec, and Jeremy N. Bailenson. 2014. The Relationship between Virtual Self Similarity and Social Anxiety. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 8 (2014), 944.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Norma Badler, Mubbasir Kapadia, Jan M. Allbeck, Yiorgos L. Chrysanthou, Nuria Pelechano, and Stephen Guy. 2014. Simulating heterogeneous crowds with interactive behaviors. In Eurographics Tutorials.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Jeremy N Bailenson, Kimberly R Swinth, Crystal L Hoyt, Susan Persky, Alex Dimov, and Jim Blascovich. 2005. The independent and interactive effects of embodied-agent appearance and behavior on self-report, cognitive, and behavioral markers of copresence in immersive virtual environments. Presence 14, 4 (2005), 379--393. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Domna Banakou, Raphaela Groten, and Mel Slater. 2013. Illusory ownership of a virtual child body causes overestimation of object sizes and implicit attitude changes. Proc. of the National Academy of Sciences 110, 31 (2013), 12846--12851.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Christoph Bartneck, Dana Kulić, Elizabeth Croft, and Susana Zoghbi. 2009. Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International journal of social robotics 1, 1 (2009), 71--81.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Dirk Bartz, Douglas Cunningham, Jan Fischer, and Christian Wallraven. 2008. The role of perception for computer graphics. Eurographics state-of-the-art-reports (2008), 65--86.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Alberto Battocchi, Fabio Pianesi, and Dina Goren-Bar. 2005. A first evaluation study of a database of kinetic facial expressions (DaFEx). In Proc. of Int. Conf. on Multimodal Interfaces (ICMI '05). 214--221. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. David C. Beardslee and Michael Ed Wertheimer. 1958. Readings in perception. (1958).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Philip Benson and David Perrett. 1992. Face to face with the perfect image. New Scientist 133 (1992), 1809.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. H. Richard Blackwell. 1952. Studies of psychophysical methods for measuring visual thresholds. JOSA 42, 9 (1952), 606--614.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Peter Borkenau and Anette Liebler. 1992. Trait inferences: Sources of validity at zero acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 62, 4 (1992), 645.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. David H. Brainard. 2003. Color appearance and color difference specification. The Science of Color 2 (2003), 191--216.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Marilynn B. Brewer. 1988. A dual process model of impression formation. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Tyler J. Burleigh, Jordan R. Schoenherr, and Guy L. Lacroix. 2013. Does the Uncanny Valley exist? An empirical test of the relationship between eeriness and the human likeness of digitally created faces. Computers in Human Behavior 29, 3 (2013), 759--771. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Thierry Chaminade, Jessica Hodgins, and Mitsuo Kawato. 2007. Anthropomorphism influences perception of computer-animated characters' actions. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 2, 3 (2007).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Marcus Cheetham, Pascal Suter, and Lutz Jäncke. 2011. The human likeness dimension of the Uncanny Valley hypothesis: Behavioral and functional MRI findings. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 5 (2011), 126.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Chaona Chen, Oliver GB Garrod, Jiayu Zhan, Jonas Beskow, Philippe G Schyns, and Rachael E Jack. 2018. Reverse Engineering Psychologically Valid Facial Expressions of Emotion into Social Robots. In Int. Conf. on Automatic Face & Gesture Recognition. 448--452.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Céline Clavel, Justine Plessier, Jean-Claude Martin, Laurent Ach, and Benoit Morel. 2009. Combining Facial and Postural Expressions of Emotions in a Virtual Character. In Proc. of Int. Conf. on Intelligent Virtual Agents (IVA '09). 287--300. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Massimiliano Corsini, Mohamed-Chaker Larabi, Guillaume Lavoué, Oldrich Petrík, Libor Vása, and Kai Wang. 2012. Perceptual Metrics for Static and Dynamic Triangle Meshes. In Eurographics STAR. 135--157.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Paul T. Costa and Robert R. McCrae. 1992. Professional manual: revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO five-factor inventory (NEO-FFI). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources (1992).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Elizabeth Crane and Melissa Gross. 2007. Motion capture and emotion: Affect detection in whole body movement. In Affective computing and intelligent interaction. Springer, 95--101. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Douglas P. Crowne and David Marlowe. 1960. A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of consulting psychology 24, 4 (1960), 349.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Douglas Cunningham and Christian Wallraven. 2013. Understanding and Designing Perceptual Experiments. In Eurographics Tutorial.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Douglas W Cunningham, Mario Kleiner, Heirich H Bülthoff, and Christian Wallraven. 2004. The components of conversational facial expressions. In Proc. of Symp. on Applied Perception in Graphics and Visualization. ACM, 143--150. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. James E Cutting and Lynn T Kozlowski. 1977. Recognizing friends by their walk: Gait perception without familiarity cues. Bulletin of the psychonomic society 9, 5 (1977), 353--356.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Zhengyan Dai and Karl F. MacDorman. 2018. The doctor's digital double: how warmth, competence, and animation promote adherence intention. PeerJ Computer Science 4 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Marco De Meijer. 1989. The contribution of general features of body movement to the attribution of emotions. Journal of Nonverbal behavior 13, 4 (1989), 247--268.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Vanderson Dill, Laura Mattos Flach, Rafael Hocevar, Christian Lykawka, Soraia Raupp Musse, and Márcio Sarroglia Pinho. 2012. Evaluation of the Uncanny Valley in CG Characters. In Proc. of Intelligent Virtual Agents. 511--513. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Stéphane Donikian, Nadia Magnenat-Thalmann, Julien Pettré, and Daniel Thalmann. 2009. In Eurographics Tutorials.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Paul Ekman. 1992. An argument for basic emotions. Cognition and Emotion 6, 3--4 (1992), 169--200.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Cathy Ennis, Ludovic Hoyet, Arjan Egges, and Rachel McDonnell. 2013. Emotion Capture: Emotionally Expressive Characters for Games. In Proc. of Motion on Games. ACM, 53--60. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Shaojing Fan, Rangding Wang, Tian-Tsong Ng, Cheston Y.-C. Tan, Jonathan S. Herberg, and Bryan L. Koenig. 2014. Human Perception of Visual Realism for Photo and Computer-Generated Face Images. ACM Transaction Applied Perception 11, 2, Article 7 (July 2014), 21 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Ylva Ferstl, Elena Kokkinara, and Rachel McDonnell. 2017. Facial Features of Non-player Creatures Can Influence Moral Decisions in Video Games. ACM Transaction on Applied Perception 15, 1, Article 4 (2017), 12 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Ylva Ferstl and Rachel McDonnell. 2018. A Perceptual Study on the Manipulation of Facial Features for Trait Portrayal in Virtual Agents. In Proc. of Int. Conf. on Intelligent Virtual Agents (IVA). 281--288. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Bernhard Fink, Karl Grammer, and Paul J. Matts. 2006. Visible skin color distribution plays a role in the perception of age, attractiveness, and health in female faces. Evolution and Human Behavior 27, 6 (2006), 845--857.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Bernhard Fink and Paul J. Matts. 2008. The effects of skin colour distribution and topography cues on the perception of female facial age and health. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology 22, 4 (2008), 493--498.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Agneta H. Fischer, Patricia M. Rodriguez Mosquera, Annelies E.M. Van Vianen, and Antony S.R. Manstead. 2004. Gender and culture differences in emotion. Emotion 4, 1 (2004), 87.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Reuben Fleming, Betty J. Mohler, Javier Romero, Michael J. Black, and Martin Breidt. 2016. Appealing Female Avatars from 3D Body Scans: Perceptual Effects of Stylization. In Int. Conf. on Computer Graphics Theory and Applications (GRAPP).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Roland W. Fleming and Heinrich H. Bülthoff. 2005. Low-Level Image Cues in the Perception of Translucent Materials. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception 2, 3 (2005), 346--382. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Roland W. Fleming, Ron O. Dror, and Edward H Adelson. 2003. Real-world illumination and the perception of surface reflectance properties. Journal of Vision 3, 6 (2003), 347--368.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Roland W. Fleming and Manish Singh. 2009. Visual Perception of 3D Shape. In ACM SIGGRAPH Courses. Article 24, 94 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Jesse. Fox and Jeremy. N. Bailenson. 2009. Virtual self-modeling: The effects of vicarious reinforcement and identification on exercise behaviors. Media Psychology 12 (2009), 1--25.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Nico H. Frijda. 1988. The laws of emotion. American psychologist 43, 5 (1988), 349.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Shawn N. Geniole, Thomas F. Denson, Barnaby J. Dixson, Justin M. Carré, and Cheryl M. McCormick. 2015. Evidence from Meta-Analyses of the Facial Width-to-Height Ratio as an Evolved Cue of Threat. PloS one 10, 7 (2015), e0132726.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Erik Geslin. 2012. Method of Induction of Basic and Complex Emotions in Video Games and Virtual Environments. In SIGGRAPH Asia 2012 Courses. Article 6, 70 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Simon Gibson and Roger J. Hubbold. 1997. Perceptually-driven radiosity. In Computer Graphics Forum, Vol. 16. Wiley Online Library, 129--141.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Alan Gilchrist, Christos Kossyfidis, Frederick Bonato, Tiziano Agostini, Joseph Cataliotti, Xiaojun Li, Branka Spehar, Vidal Annan, and Elias Economou. 1999. An anchoring theory of lightness perception. Psychological Review 106, 4 (1999).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Mashhuda Glencross, Alan G. Chalmers, Ming C. Lin, Ming C. Lin, Miguel A. Otaduy, and Diego Gutierrez. 2006a. Exploiting Perception in High-fidelity Virtual environments. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2006 Courses. Article 1. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Mashhuda Glencross, Alan G. Chalmers, Ming C. Lin, Ming C. Lin, Miguel A. Otaduy, and Diego Gutierrez. 2006b. Exploiting Perception in High-fidelity Virtual environments. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2006 Courses (SIGGRAPH '06). Article 1. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Lewis R. Goldberg. 1990. An alternative "description of personality": the big-five factor structure. Journal of personality and social psychology 59, 6 (1990), 1216.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  54. Geoffrey Gorisse, Olivier Christmann, Samory Houzangbe, and Simon Richir. 2019. From Robot to Virtual Doppelganger: Impact of Visual Fidelity of Avatars Controlled in Third-Person Perspective on Embodiment and Behavior in Immersive Virtual Environments. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 6 (2019), 8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. Karl Grammer and Elisabeth Oberzaucher. 2006. The reconstruction of facial expressions in embodied systems. ZiF: mitteilungen 2 (2006), 14--31.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Robert D. Green, Karl F. MacDorman, Chin-Chang Ho, and Sandosh Vasudevan. 2008. Sensitivity to the proportions of faces that vary in human likeness. Computers in Human Behavior 24, 5 (2008), 2456--2474. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Anthony G. Greenwald, Debbie E. McGhee, and Jordan L.K. Schwartz. 1998. Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test. Journal of personality and social psychology 74, 6 (1998), 1464.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  58. Torben Grodal. 2005. Film Lighting and Mood. Moving Image Theory: Ecological Considerations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. Rudolf Groner, Franziska Walder, and Marina Groner. 1984. Looking at faces: local and global aspects of scanpaths. Theoretical and applied aspects of eye movements research (1984), 523--533.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. John Hamill, Rachel McDonnell, Simon Dobbyn, and Carol O'Sullivan. 2005. Perceptual evaluation of impostor representations for virtual humans and buildings. In Computer Graphics Forum, Vol. 24. Wiley Online Library, 623--633.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. David Hanson. 2005. Expanding the Aesthetics Possibilities for Humanlike Robots. In Proc. of IEEE Humanoid Robotics Conf., Special Session on the Uncanny Valley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Aaron Hertzmann, Carol O'Sullivan, and Ken Perlin. 2009. Realistic human body movement for emotional expressiveness. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2009 Courses. 1--27. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. Harold Hill and Alan Johnston. 2001. Categorizing sex and identity from the biological motion of faces. Current biology 11, 11 (2001), 880--885.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Chin-Chang Ho and Karl F. MacDorman. 2010. Revisiting the Uncanny Valley theory: Developing and validating an alternative to the Godspeed indices. Computers in Human Behavior 26, 6 (2010), 1508--1518. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  65. Yun-Xian Ho, Michael S. Landy, and Laurence T. Maloney. 2006. How direction of illumination affects visually perceived surface roughness. Journal of Vision 6, 8 (2006), 634--648.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  66. Jessica Hodgins, Sophie Jörg, Carol O'Sullivan, Sang Il Park, and Moshe Mahler. 2010. The saliency of anomalies in animated human characters. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception 7, 4 (2010). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  67. Ludovic Hoyet, Kenneth Ryall, Katja Zibrek, Hwangpil Park, Jehee Lee, Jessica Hodgins, and Carol O'Sullivan. 2013. Evaluating the Distinctiveness and Attractiveness of Human Motions on Realistic Virtual Bodies. ACM Transaction Graphics 32, 6 (2013), 204:1--204:11. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  68. Ying Hu, Connor J. Parde, Matthew Q. Hill, Naureen Mahmood, and Alice J. O'Toole. 2018. First Impressions of Personality Traits From Body Shapes. Psychological Science 29, 12 (2018), 1969--1983.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  69. Stephanie Huerre, Jehee Lee, Ming Lin, and Carol O'Sullivan. 2010. Simulating Believable Crowd and Group Behaviors. In ACM SIGGRAPH ASIA 2010 Courses. Article 13, 92 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  70. Jennifer Hyde, Elizabeth J. Carter, Sara Kiesler, and Jessica K. Hodgins. 2013. Perceptual Effects of Damped and Exaggerated Facial Motion in Animated Characters. (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. Adrian Jarabo, Tom Van Eyck, Veronica Sundstedt, Kavita Bala, Diego Gutierrez, and Carol O'Sullivan. 2012. Crowd Light: Evaluating the Perceived Fidelity of Illuminated Dynamic Scenes. Computer Graphics Forum 31, 2 (2012), 565--574. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  72. Arthur R. Jensen. 1965. Scoring the Stroop test. Acta psychologica 24, 5 (1965), 398--408.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. Gunnar Johansson. 1973. Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis. Perception & Psychophysics 14, 2 (1973), 201--211.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  74. Oliver P John, Laura P Naumann, and Christopher J Soto. 2008. Paradigm shift to the integrative big five trait taxonomy. Handbook of personality: Theory and research 3 (2008), 114--158.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. Kerri L. Johnson, Lawrie S. McKay, and Frank E. Pollick. 2011. He throws like a girl (but only when he's sad): Emotion affects sex-decoding of biological motion displays. Cognition 119, 2 (2011), 265--280.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  76. Kerri L Johnson and Louis G Tassinary. 2007. Compatibility of basic social perceptions determines perceived attractiveness. Proc. of the National Academy of Sciences 104, 12 (2007), 5246--5251.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  77. Yvonne Jung, Arjan Kuijper, Dieter W. Fellner, Michael Kipp, Jan Miksatko, Jonathan Gratch, and Daniel Thalmann. 2011. Believable Virtual Characters in Human-Computer Dialogs. In Eurographics STAR.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  78. Ludwig Kardos. 1934. Ding und Schatten. Eine experimentelle Untersuchung Ãijber die Grundlagen des Farbensehens. Zeitschrift für Psychologie und Physiologie der Sinnesorgane (1934).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  79. Jari Kätsyri, Klaus Förger, Meeri. Mäkäräinen, and Tapio Takala. 2015. A review of empirical evidence on different Uncanny Valley hypotheses: Support for perceptual mismatch as one road to the valley of eeriness. Frontiers in Psychology 6 (2015), 390.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  80. Alexander Keller. 1997. Instant radiosity. In Proc. of ACM SIGGRAPH. 49--56. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  81. Lynn T Kozlowski and James E Cutting. 1977. Recognizing the sex of a walker from a dynamic point-light display. Perception & Psychophysics 21, 6 (1977), 575--580.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  82. Jaroslav Křivánek, James A. Ferwerda, and Kavita Bala. 2010. Effects of global illumination approximations on material appearance. ACM Transaction on Graphics 29, 4 (2010), 112:1--112:10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  83. Michéal Larkin and Carol O'Sullivan. 2011. Perception of Simplification Artifacts for Animated Characters. In Proc. of Symp. on Applied Perception in Graphics and Visualization (APGV '11). 93--100. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  84. Jehee Lee, Jinxiang Chai, Paul SA Reitsma, Jessica K Hodgins, and Nancy S Pollard. 2002. Interactive control of avatars animated with human motion data. In ACM Transaction on Graphics (TOG), Vol. 21. ACM, 491--500. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  85. Michael Lewis, Jeannette M. Haviland-Jones, and Lisa F. Barrett. 2008. Handbook of Emotions, Third Edition. Guilford Publications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  86. Jamy Li, René Kizilcec, Jeremy Bailenson, and Wendy Ju. 2016. Social robots and virtual agents as lecturers for video instruction. Computers in Human Behavior 55 (2016), 1222 -- 1230. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  87. Anthony C Little and Peter JB Hancock. 2002. The role of masculinity and distinctiveness in judgements of human male facial attractiveness. British Journal of Psychology 93, 4 (2002), 451--464.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  88. Alexander D Logvinenko and Laurence T Maloney. 2006. The proximity structure of achromatic surface colors and the impossibility of asymmetric lightness matching. Perception & Psychophysics 68, 1 (2006), 76--83.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  89. Christine E. Looser and Thalia Wheatley. 2010. The tipping point of animacy how, when, and where we perceive life in a face. Psychological Science 21, 12 (2010), 1854--1862.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  90. David Luebke, Martin Reddy, Jonathan D. Cohen, Amitabh Varshney, Benjamin Watson, and Robert Huebner. 2003. Level of Detail for 3D Graphics. Morgan Kaufmann. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  91. Wanli Ma, Shihong Xia, Jessica K Hodgins, Xiao Yang, Chunpeng Li, and Zhaoqi Wang. 2010. Modeling style and variation in human motion. In Proc. of Symp. on Computer Animation. Eurographics Association, 21--30. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  92. Karl F. MacDorman. 2006. Subjective ratings of robot video clips for human likeness, familiarity, and eeriness: An exploration of the Uncanny Valley. In Proc. of ICCS/CogSci Long Symp.: Towards Social Mechanisms of Android Science.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  93. Karl F. MacDorman, Robert D. Green, Chin-Chang Ho, and Clinton T. Koch. 2009. Too real for comfort? Uncanny responses to computer generated faces. Computers in Human Behavior 25, 3 (2009), 695--710. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  94. Brandon Mader, Martin S. Banks, and Hany Farid. 2017. Identifying Computer-Generated Portraits: The Importance of Training and Incentives. Perception 46, 9 (2017), 1062--1076.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  95. Katerina Mania and Erik Reinhard. 2008. Perceptually-Motivated Graphics. In Eurographics Tutorials.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  96. Scott McCloud. 1993. Understanding Comics. William Morrow Paperbacks.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  97. Rachel McDonnell, Martin Breidt, and Heinrich H. Bülthoff. 2012. Render me real? Investigating the effect of render style on the perception of animated virtual humans. ACM Transaction on Graphics 31, 4 (2012), 91:1--91:11. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  98. Rachel McDonnell, Simon Dobbyn, Steven Collins, and Carol O'Sullivan. 2006. Perceptual Evaluation of LOD Clothing for Virtual Humans. In Proc. of Symp. on Computer Animation (SCA '06). 117--126. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  99. Rachel McDonnell, Sophie Jörg, Jessica K Hodgins, Fiona Newell, and Carol O'sullivan. 2009a. Evaluating the effect of motion and body shape on the perceived sex of virtual characters. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception (TAP) 5, 4 (2009), 20. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  100. Rachel McDonnell, Sophie Jörg, Joanna McHugh, Fiona N Newell, and Carol O'Sullivan. 2009b. Investigating the role of body shape on the perception of emotion. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception (TAP) 6, 3 (2009), 14. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  101. Rachel McDonnell, Michéal Larkin, Simon Dobbyn, Steven Collins, and Carol O'Sullivan. 2008. Clone attack! perception of crowd variety. ACM Transaction on Graphics (TOG) 27, 3 (2008), 26. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  102. Rachel McDonnell, Micheal Larkin, Benjamin Hernandez, Isaac Rudomin,, and Carol O'Sullivan. 2009c. Eye-catching Crowds: Saliency based Selective Variation. ACM Transaction on Graphics 28, 3 (2009), 55:1 -- 55:10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  103. Rachel McDonnell and Carol O'Sullivan. 2010. Movements and voices affect perceived sex of virtual conversers. In Proc. of Symp. on Applied Perception in Graphics and Visualization. ACM, 125--128. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  104. Ann McNamara, Katerina Mania, and Diego Gutierrez. 2011. Perception in Graphics, Visualization, Virtual Environments and Animation. In SIGGRAPH Asia 2011 Courses. Article 17, 137 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  105. Matthias R Mehl, Samuel D Gosling, and James W Pennebaker. 2006. Personality in its natural habitat: Manifestations and implicit folk theories of personality in daily life. Journal of personality and social psychology 90, 5 (2006), 862.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  106. Albert Mehrabian. 1980. Basic Dimensions for a General Psychological Theory Implications for Personality, Social, Environmental, and Developmental Studies. (1980).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  107. Edward R. Morrison, Lisa Gralewski, Neill Campbell, and Ian S. Penton-Voak. 2007. Facial movement varies by sex and is related to attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior 28, 3 (2007), 186--192.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  108. Michael Neff, Yingying Wang, Rob Abbott, and Marilyn Walker. 2010. Evaluating the effect of gesture and language on personality perception in conversational agents. In Int. Conf. on Intelligent Virtual Agents. Springer, 222--235. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  109. Paula M Niedenthal, Jamin B Halberstadt, Jonathan Margolin, and Åse H Innes-Ker. 2000. Emotional state and the detection of change in facial expression of emotion. European Journal of Social Psychology 30, 2 (2000), 211--222.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  110. Birgit Nitzsche and Karsten Rose. 2011. Bodyshop: The Photoshop Retouching Guide for the Face and Body. Wiley. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  111. Maria Olkkonen and David H. Brainard. 2010. Perceived glossiness and lightness under real-world illumination. Journal of Vision 10, 9 (2010).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  112. Maria Olkkonen and David H. Brainard. 2011. Joint effects of illumination geometry and object shape in the perception of surface reflectance. i-Perception 2 (2011), 1014--1034.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  113. Carol O'Sullivan, Sarah Howlett, Yann Morvan, Rachel McDonnell, and Keith O'Conor. 2004. Perceptually Adaptive Graphics. In Eurographics STAR.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  114. Ye Pan and Anthony Steed. 2016. A Comparison of Avatar-, Video-, and Robot-Mediated Interaction on Users Trust in Expertise. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 3 (2016), 12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  115. E Ashby Plant, Janet Shibley Hyde, Dacher Keltner, and Patricia G Devine. 2000. The gender stereotyping of emotions. Psychology of Women Quarterly 24, 1 (2000), 81--92.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  116. Robert Plutchik. 2001. The Nature of Emotions Human emotions have deep evolutionary roots, a fact that may explain their complexity and provide tools for clinical practice. American Scientist 89, 4 (2001), 344--350.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  117. Jennifer Lee Poland. 2015. Light, Camera, Emotion! An Examination on Film Lighting and It's Impact on Audiences' Emotional Response. Cleveland State University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  118. Frank E Pollick, Helena M Paterson, Armin Bruderlin, and Anthony J Sanford. 2001. Perceiving affect from arm movement. Cognition 82, 2 (2001), B51--B61.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  119. Sylvia C. Pont and Susan F. te Pas. 2006. Material - illumination ambiguities and the perception of solid objects. Perception 35 (2006), 1331--1350.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  120. Martin Pražák and Carol O'Sullivan. 2011. Perceiving human motion variety. In Proc. of Symp. on Applied Perception in Graphics and Visualization. ACM, 87--92. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  121. Pablo Mauricio Rademacher. 2002. Measuring the Perceived Visual Realism of Images. PhD Thesis.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  122. Pablo Mauricio Rademacher, Jed Lengyel, Edward Cutrell, and Turner Whitted. 2001. Measuring the Perception of Visual Realism in Images. In Proc. of the Eurographics Symp. on Rendering (EGSR). 235--247. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  123. Pallavi Raiturkar, Hany Farid, and Eakta Jain. 2018. Identifying Computer-Generated Portraits: an Eye Tracking Study. Technical Report. University of Florida.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  124. John F Rauthmann, Christian T Seubert, Pierre Sachse, and Marco R Furtner. 2012. Eyes as windows to the soul: gazing behavior is related to personality. Journal of Research in Personality 46, 2 (2012), 147--156.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  125. Gillian Rhodes. 2006. The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 57 (2006), 199--226.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  126. Kiaran Ritchie, Jake. Callery, and Karim. Biri. 2005. The Art of Rigging: A Definitive Guide to Character Technical Direction with Alias Maya. Vol. 1. Alias.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  127. Kerstin Ruhland, Christopher E Peters, Sean Andrist, Jeremy B Badler, Norman I Badler, Michael Gleicher, Bilge Mutlu, and Rachel McDonnell. 2015a. A review of eye gaze in virtual agents, social robotics and hci: Behaviour generation, user interaction and perception. In Computer graphics forum, Vol. 34. Wiley Online Library, 299--326. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  128. Kerstin Ruhland, Katja Zibrek, and Rachel McDonnell. 2015b. Perception of personality through eye gaze of realistic and cartoon models. In Proc. of Symp. on Applied Perception. ACM, 19--23. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  129. James A Russell. 1980. A circumplex model of affect. Journal of personality and social psychology 39, 6 (1980), 1161.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  130. Edward Schneider, Yifan Wang, and Shanshan Yang. 2007. Exploring the Uncanny Valley with Japanese Video Game Characters. In Situated Play: Proc. of Digital Games Research Association Conference.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  131. D. Samuel Schwarzkopf, Chen Song, and Geraint Rees. 2011. The surface area of human V1 predicts the subjective experience of object size. Nature neuroscience 14, 1 (2011), 28.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  132. Valentin Schwind and Solveigh Jäger. 2016. The Uncanny Valley and the Importance of Eye Contact. i-com (2016), 93--104. Issue 15.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  133. Philippe G Schyns, Lucy S Petro, and Marie L Smith. 2009. Transmission of facial expressions of emotion co-evolved with their efficient decoding in the brain: behavioral and brain evidence. PLoS One 4, 5 (2009), e5625.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  134. Kathryn Y. Segovia and Jeremy N. Bailenson. 2012. Virtual imposters: Responses to avatars that do not look like their controllers. Social Influence 7, 4 (2012), 285--303.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  135. Jun'ichiro Seyama and Ruth S. Nagayama. 2007. The Uncanny Valley: Effect of Realism on the Impression of Artificial Human Faces. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 16, 4 (2007), 337--351. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  136. Anne Thaler, Ivelina Piryankova, Jeanine K. Stefanucci, Sergi Pujades, Stephan de la Rosa, Stephan Streuber, Javier Romero, Michael J. Black, and Betty J. Mohler. 2018. Visual Perception and Evaluation of Photo-Realistic Self-Avatars From 3D Body Scans in Males and Females. Frontiers in ICT 5 (Sept. 2018), 1--14.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  137. Daniel Thalmann, Carol O'Sullivan, Pablo de Heras Ciechomski, and Simon Dobbyn. 2006. Populating Virtual Environments with Crowds. In Eurographics Tutorials.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  138. Daniel Thalmann, Carol O'Sullivan, Barbara Yersin, Jonathan Maim, and Rachel McDonnell. 2007. Populating Virtual Environments with Crowds. In Eurographics Tutorials.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  139. Angela Tinwell, Deborah Abdel Nabi, and John P Charlton. 2013. Perception of psychopathy and the Uncanny Valley in virtual characters. Computers in Human Behavior 29, 4 (2013), 1617--1625. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  140. Peter Vangorp. 2009. Human Visual Perception of Materials in Realistic Computer Graphics. PhD Thesis, University Leuven.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  141. Peter Vangorp, Jurgen Laurijssen, and Philip Dutre. 2007. The Influence of Shape on the Perception of Material Reflectance. ACM Transaction on Graphics 26, 3 (2007), 77:1--77:9. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  142. Matias Volante, Sabarish V Babu, Himanshu Chaturvedi, Nathan Newsome, Elham Ebrahimi, Tania Roy, Shaundra B Daily, and Tracy Fasolino. 2016. Effects of virtual human appearance fidelity on emotion contagion in affective inter-personal simulations. IEEE Transaction on Visualization and Computer Graphics 22, 4 (2016), 1326--1335. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  143. Ekaterina P. Volkova, Betty J. Mohler, Trevor J. Dodds, Joachim Tesch, and Heinrich H. Bülthoff. 2014. Emotion categorization of body expressions in narrative scenarios. Frontiers in Psychology 5 (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  144. Christian Wallraven, Martin Breidt, Douglas W. Cunningham, and Heinrich H. Bülthoff. 2008. Evaluating the perceptual realism of animated facial expressions. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception 4, 4 (2008), 4:1--4:20. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  145. Christian Wallraven, Heinrich H. Bülthoff, Douglas W. Cunningham, Jan Fischer, and Dirk Bartz. 2007. Evaluation of real-world and computer-generated stylized facial expressions. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception 4, 3, Article 16 (2007). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  146. Thomas Waltemate, Dominik Gall, Daniel Roth, Mario Botsch, and Marc Erich Latoschik. 2018. The Impact of Avatar Personalization and Immersion on Virtual Body Ownership, Presence, and Emotional Response. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 24, 4 (2018), 1643--1652. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  147. Yuqiong Wang, Joe Geigel, and Andrew Herbert. 2013. Reading Personality: Avatar vs. Human Faces. In Humaine Association Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction. 479--484. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  148. Max Wertheimer. 1923. A brief introduction to gestalt, identifying key theories and principles. Psychol Forsch 4 (1923), 301--350.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  149. Pisut Wisessing, John Dingliana, and Rachel McDonnell. 2016. Perception of Lighting and Shading for Animated Virtual Characters. In Proc. of ACM Symp. of Applied Perception (SAP). 25--29. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  150. Nick Yee, Jeremy N Bailenson, and Kathryn Rickertsen. 2007. A Meta-analysis of the Impact of the Inclusion and Realism of Human-like Faces on User Experiences in Interfaces. In Proc. of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '07). 1--10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  151. Lesslie A. Zebrowitz, Luminita Voinescu, and Mary Ann Collins. 1996. "wideeyed" and "crooked-faced": Determinants of perceived and real honesty across the life span. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 12, 12 (1996), 1258--âĂŞ1269.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  152. Eduard Zell, Carlos Aliaga, Adrian Jarabo, Katja Zibrek, Diego Gutierrez, Rachel McDonnell, and Mario Botsch. 2015. To Stylize or Not to Stylize?: The Effect of Shape and Material Stylization on the Perception of Computer-generated Faces. ACM Transactions on Graphics 34, 6, Article 184 (2015), 184:1--184:12 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  153. Katja Zibrek, Ludovic Hoyet, Kerstin Ruhland, and Rachel McDonnell. 2015. Exploring the effect of motion type and emotions on the perception of gender in virtual humans. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception (TAP) 12, 3 (2015), 11. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  154. Katja Zibrek, Elena Kokkinara, and Rachel McDonnell. 2018. The Effect of Realistic Appearance of Virtual Characters in Immersive Environments-Does the Character's Personality Play a Role? IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 24, 4 (2018), 1681--1690. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  155. Katja Zibrek and Rachel McDonnell. 2014. Does render style affect perception of personality in virtual humans?. In Proc. of ACM Symp. on Applied Perception (SAP). 111--115. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

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

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    SIGGRAPH '19: ACM SIGGRAPH 2019 Courses
    July 2019
    3772 pages
    ISBN:9781450363075
    DOI:10.1145/3305366

    Copyright © 2019 Owner/Author

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 28 July 2019

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • course

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate1,822of8,601submissions,21%

    Upcoming Conference

    SIGGRAPH '24

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader