Using Blur to Affect Perceived Distance and Size
Abstract
We present a probabilistic model of how viewers may use defocus blur in conjunction with other pictorial cues to estimate the absolute distances to objects in a scene. Our model explains how the pattern of blur in an image together with relative depth cues indicates the apparent scale of the image’s contents. From the model, we develop a semi-automated algorithm that applies blur to a sharply rendered image and thereby changes the apparent distance and scale of the scene’s contents. To examine the correspondence between the model/algorithm and actual viewer experience, we conducted an experiment with human viewers and compared their estimates of absolute distance to the model’s predictions. We did this for images with geometrically correct blur due to defocus and for images with commonly used approximations to the correct blur. The agreement between the experimental data and model predictions was excellent. The model predicts that some approximations should work well and that others should not. Human viewers responded to the various types of blur in much the way the model predicts. The model and algorithm allow one to manipulate blur precisely and to achieve the desired perceived scale efficiently.
Supplemental Material

Explanatory Video
Video
SIGGRAPH 2010 Talk Slides (PDF)
PDF
Results for the seven subjects in the psychophysical study
PDF
Movie: Transition from far to near focal length
VideoRaw Images
Pinhole Image (No Blur)
Open LinkConsistent Blur: 0.36m Simulated Focal Distance (Aperture = 10.0m)
Open LinkConsistent Blur: 0.23m Simulated Focal Distance (Aperture = 15.65m)
Open LinkConsistent Blur: 0.15m Simulated Focal Distance (Aperture = 24.5m)
Open LinkConsistent Blur: 0.09m Simulated Focal Distance (Aperture = 38.34m)
Open LinkConsistent Blur: 0.06m Simulated Focal Distance (Aperture = 60.0m)
Open LinkVertical Linear Blur Gradient: 0.36m Simulated Focal Distance
Open LinkVertical Linear Blur Gradient: 0.23m Simulated Focal Distance
Open LinkVertical Linear Blur Gradient: 0.15m Simulated Focal Distance
Open LinkVertical Linear Blur Gradient: 0.09m Simulated Focal Distance
Open LinkVertical Linear Blur Gradient: 0.06m Simulated Focal Distance
Open LinkHorizontal Linear Blur Gradient: 0.36m Simulated Focal Distance
Open LinkHorizontal Linear Blur Gradient: 0.23m Simulated Focal Distance
Open LinkHorizontal Linear Blur Gradient: 0.15m Simulated Focal Distance
Open LinkHorizontal Linear Blur Gradient: 0.09m Simulated Focal Distance
Open LinkHorizontal Linear Blur Gradient: 0.06m Simulated Focal Distance
Open LinkCitation
Robert T. Held, Emily A. Cooper, James F. O'Brien, and Martin S. Banks. "Using Blur to Affect Perceived Distance and Size". ACM Transactions on Graphics, 29(2):19:1–16, March 2010.