Post on 16-Dec-2015
Filler Mean Rating (N=32)
African 6.406Singer 6.250Blake 6.219Buettner2 5.969 Saper 5.938Kinstler2 5.688
Buettner 5.375 Kinstler 5.219 Hopper 4.969 Horton 4.844 Paint4.812Pastel 4.719
Drut 3.688Drut23.469Freud 3.406 Monahan 3.344 Tibet 3.312Sutherland 3.031 Horton2 2.938 Rodwell 2.875
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
A painted portrait differs from a photo in that the artist intentionally selects only certain regions for fine detail (i.e., narrow versus broad brushwork) and the contrast level of edges. Although artists and art critics have claimed that these choices guide the viewer’s eyes, this claim has not been thoroughly tested. In past studies of viewers gazing at original works of art, interpretation is complicated because regions of fine and coarse detail also differ in other ways (e.g., whether they are foreground or background). Here we monitored the gaze of participants viewing photos and paintings of the same portrait view, inspired by Rembrandt’s portraits (e.g., Self Portrait with Beret, 1659). The paintings were created by a non-photorealistic rendering technique to mimic Rembrandt’s style (DiPaola, 2007). In each painting, four regions of interest were selected for systematic variation in level of detail: left versus right eye region in finer detail and left versus right collar region in finer detail. Both original and mirror image views were tested to control for side biases. Participants viewed each portrait for a 5 sec period — in the context of viewing many portraits rendered in a wide range of styles —assigning ratings of artistic merit to each portrait. Analysis of the gaze patterns showed that fewer fixations were made overall when viewing paintings than photos, and that viewer’s eyes were both attracted to and dwelt longer in the eye region of a portrait that was rendered in finer detail. Even regions of the paintings that were rarely fixated directly (i.e., collar regions below each face) nevertheless guided the gaze of viewers, specifically enhancing the salience of eyes rendered in fine detail on the same side of the portrait. This implies that Rembrandt and other master portraitists use an effective implicit theory of gaze direction. - Riebe, DiPaola, Enns,
Working Abstract
Following the masters: Viewer gaze is directed by relative detail in painted portraits
Total Fixation Frequency (all image types)
12
13
14
15
16
17
Tot
al F
ixat
ion
Fre
quen
cy
Filler Art Input Photos Opposite Same-side
Focus Regions in Critical Images
- critical art has fewer fixations (fewer saccades) overall than either filler art or photos
- reducing detail and selectively emphasizing detail “quiets” the eye
FOCUSBlur FOCUSBlur
SHARPsoft
SHARP soft
Total Dwell Time (all image types)
3800
3850
3900
3950
4000
4050
4100
4150
4200
Tot
al F
ixat
ion
Tim
e (m
s)
Filler Art Input Photos Opposite Same-side
Focus Regions in Critical Images
- photos have slightly longer total fixation dwell times than either filler art or critical art (across all fixations)
- very small effect (~ 50 ms)
FOCUSBlur FOCUSBlur
SHARPsoft
SHARP soft
First Fixation Time to either Eye Region (ROI 1, 2) “Attention-getting”
800
850
900
950
1000
1050
1100
1150
1200
Tim
e of
Firs
t F
ixat
ion
Original Photo
Sharp Edge on Side of Blur
Focus Blur Focus Blur
Sharp Edge on Side of Focus
- focused eye region attracts first fixation faster than blurred eye region
-100-200 ms effect!
- fixation to blurred eye region is especially slow when there is a sharp edge on same side as the blur
FOCUSBlur FOCUSBlur
SHARPsoft
SHARP soft
First Fixation Duration in Eye Regions (ROI 1, 2) “Attention-holding”
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
Firs
t F
ixat
ion
Dur
atio
n
Original Photo
Sharp Edge on Side of Blur
Focus Blur Focus Blur
Sharp Edge on Side of Focus
-focused eye region holds first fixation longer than blurred eye region, more so when sharp edge on same side
- 20 - 40 ms effect!
- background: attended/remembered regions are fixated longer
- sharp edge is an attractant that is stronger when its on opposite side of current fixation
FOCUSBlur FOCUSBlur
SHARPsoft
SHARP soft
Frequency of Fixations in Eye Regions: Repeated “Attention-getting”
2.5
2.7
2.9
3.1
3.3
3.5
3.7
3.9
4.1
4.3
4.5
Fix
atio
n F
requ
ency
Original Photo
Sharp Edge on Side of Blur
Focus Blur Focus Blur
Sharp Edge on Side of Focus
- eyes in critical art attract more looks than eyes in photos
- focused eye region attracts repeated fixation more than blurred eye region, but only when sharp edge on opposite side of focused eye
-more back-forth competition from opposite side attractor than from same side??
FOCUSBlur FOCUSBlur
SHARPsoft
SHARP soft
Proportion Dwell Time in Eye Regions (ROI 1, 2)
.10
.15
.20
.25
.30
.35
.40
Pro
por
tion
of T
ime
in E
ye R
egio
ns
Original Photo
Sharp Edge on Side of Blur
Focus Blur Focus Blur
Sharp Edge on Side of Focus
- eyes in critical art attract more looking time than eyes in photos
-focused eye region attracts more overall gaze than blurred eye region, but only when sharp edge on opposite side of focused eye
-more back-forth competition from opposite side attractor than from same side??
FOCUSBlur FOCUSBlur
SHARPsoft
SHARP soft
Frequency of Successive Saccades in Eye Regions (ROI 1, 2)
Stay
Move
.6
.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
Input Photo Focus Region Blur Region
Critical Images
Fre
quen
cy o
f N
ext
Sa
ccad
e
FOCUSBlur
- eyes in critical art attract more successive looks in same region than eyes in photos
- focused eye region attracts more successive fixations than blurred eye region
Probability Moving from one Eye Region to another vs Staying in Same Region
.20
.25
.30
.35
.40
.45
.50
.55
.60
Pro
po
rtio
n S
acc
ad
es
to N
ew
Re
gio
n
Original Photo
Sharp Edge on Side of Blur
Focus -> Blur
Sharp Edge on Side of Focus
Blur -> Focus
Focus -> Blur
Blur -> Focus
- move vs stay probability is 50% in photos
- move from blur -> focused eye more likely when sharp edge on opposite side of focused eye
FOCUSBlur FOCUSBlur
SHARPsoft
SHARP soft