Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!bionet!agate!eos!data.nas.nasa.gov!wilbur.nas.nasa.gov!eugene
From: eugene@nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
Subject: Re: Psycho Graphics (was: Subjective Graphics)
Keywords: perception,subjective reality,adaptive rendering
Message-ID: <1991Feb12.013754.5320@nas.nasa.gov>
Date: 12 Feb 91 01:37:54 GMT
References: <1991Jan30.173630.21099@nas.nasa.gov> <1991Jan31.120714.22611@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> <1991Feb1.082556.8553@agate.berkeley.edu> <2899@charon.cwi.nl> <1991Feb7.093627.3734@santra.uucp>
Sender: news@nas.nasa.gov
Reply-To: eugene@wilbur.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Organization: NAS Program, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Lines: 53

In article <1991Feb7.093627.3734@santra.uucp> raisa@hila.hut.fi
(Olli R{is{) writes:
>In article <2899@charon.cwi.nl> edwin@cwi.nl (Edwin Blake) writes:

>>   I think we need a new catch phrase: Subjective Graphics (!), to emphasize
>> the human orientation of the subject.

How about "good-enough" synthesis?

>I prefer "Psycho Graphics". Are there any other suggestions? 
>(It may be better to discuss the terminology well in advance
> than to suffer from bad mistakes, such as "distributed ray
> tracing", in the future :-) )

How about just plain "human factors?"
Why does this remind me of Tony Perkins?.......  Or Mel Brooks?

>Anyway, critisism against physics as the sole base for realistic 
>visualization sounds justified.

Er? A?  Pray tell, what other bases would you suggest?

Simple texture mapping is fine for static images.

I found an interesting book the other day while visiting a friend (a
physicist) in Sant Cruz.  Since Bill is giving a talk locally on
"Exploratory Computer Graphics" I figured he could borrow it.  The book
is on the measurement and characterization of images and pictures.
At lest a 1/3 of the book was devoted to color, spatial, relations, FFTs,
etc. are inside.  I'll post a ref after he give his Thursday talk.

I think we have to develop a group of people with a particular set of
critical eyes.  In the remote sensing community, they are called
photo-interpreters.  An unusual group of people.  For some classes of
user, I call them "computational test pilots."  Like being a plane builder,
you might not be the expert to fly it.  There can also be naive audiences,
and then the in between people, the "regular pilots."

Consider something I pointed out to Charles Harris (Hi Charles, yes, I owe
you some text).  Look at the cover of Pixel.  That's supposed to be the
universe there.  That's the higher luminal light source? 8^)  Do you see
the picture?  I suspect a few of your do, and many don't.  Similar
problems occur on the subatomic end of the scale.  But in the middle,
you get "good-enough graphics."

I'll post the book's reference when I get it back after Friday.

Timmy Leary was also mentioned in the same breath as being at SIGGRAPH,
I think he also attends Hacker's Conference as well.

--e. nobuo miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov
  {uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene
  AMERICA: CHANGE IT OR LOSE IT.