Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

http://www.cs.northwestern.edu/~ago820/matting.pdf

Enhancing Perceived Depth in Images via Artistic Matting

IMO many may find this a most informative article. I should add that its message is fully as applicable to displaying images on-line as by matting and framing for hanging on the wall.

We post many images in hope that their inherent depth can be displayed.
Here are a few images demonstrating, I think, the difference between the "naked" image compared with the "matted" image.

Dave

Dave

Matting1

(Download)

Matting2

(Download)

Matting3

(Download)

Billyspad Loc: The Philippines

The difference the matting makes is quite amazing Dave. Thank you for pointing it out.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Super, Dave. Thanks for the info and examples!

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

Wonderfull information professor.

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

The attached article is very indepth and almost formulaic. Do you follow the formula, or have you learned to mat-by-eye? S-

RickH Loc: Toronto, Canada

really interesting post, thanks for these images!

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

A very astute question, Steve, that must occur to any that are long used to cutting their own mattes...and drawing conclusions based on personal anecdotal experience.
I am of the opinion that Gooch (Bruce, the prime mover of this publication) had, from personal experience, reached conclusions, and then, noting the relatively consistent reliability thereof, sought objective justification for them. That is, after all, a not uncommon genesis of testable hypotheses in many realms of science.
It is, however, in his experimental design and data collection that his work is a bit "wobbly". Not fraudulant, nor even patently incorrect, mind you...just awaiting more definitive confirmation. The behavioral sciences are fraught with such problems, particularly when dealing with such a personalized, relative phenomenon as "perception".

As a matter of fact, I am a bit surprised that the examples I have have posted have not attracted a few " whaddayatawkinabout" sorts of responses. I had no expectation that everyone would equally and uniformly agree with the idea that the matted images consistently emphasize the putative inheherent perspective present within each image ("perception" bein' so personal, 'n'all....)

Dave

Dave

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

Appreciate! S-

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

One of my favorite passages in Gooch's article is his quote of Mendgen:

"A matte says the work before you is not a work of nature, but a creation of an artist; its only demand is to be looked at and enjoyed... The artwork wants to make you party to a deception, but do not allow it to go too far. No matter how real it seems, you must always remember that it is only an
Illusion, in other words you must consciously allow yourself to be deceived."

Dave

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

All part of the magic, and yet so true! S-

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

And yet...so often not understood!

This thread has rec. positive comments, but I really am also interested in how many folks do NOT perceive any accentuation of depth cues in the images posted.

Thanks,
Dave

PAR4DCR Loc: A Sunny Place

Very dramatic difference Dave. I lean toward matting certain images and you have just reinforced that. Thanks for posting.

Don

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

Thank you, Don. I am, in fact, working on characterizing features of images that would suggest they are more likely to benefit from "Artistic Matting" to differentiate them from images least likely to reap such benefits.
At this point, the bottom line seems to be that such matting can be relied upon to remarkably emphasize the effects of extant depth cues, while images devoid of even subtle hints of enhanced depth are bound no to benefit in the slightest from such matting.
The adage " Y' can't makes a silk purse out of a pig's ear" definitely applies.

Best regards,
Dave

minniev Loc: MIssissippi

Thank you for an interesting article and your own illustrations that make it real for us. I have begun cutting my own mattes, though admittedly without thought for these concepts, just sort of aimlessly choosing colors and measurements that I think may work for an image. This is very helpful.

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

Thanks, Min, for looking, and for your comments. I might add to the article by stating that the matte should extend beyond the image by at least 25% of the maximum dimension of the print. Less than that, and the depth enhancement effect is progressively diminished. I also,agree that the bottom piece of the matte ought be at least 10% wider than the sides and top pieces.
I think the examples below illustrate the effect of assymmetric matting when the disappearing posing is well off to one side of the image.

Another very useful point is illustrated in Figure 2: that when a diminishing point is at or near an edge, the width of the matte (and secondary matte) on the opposite side ought be increased to enhance the already present depth illusion.

Remember, it's all about the illusions we agree to " buy into". To follow up on Big Steve's comment, have you had your Koolaid today?

Dave

A symmetric matte

(Download)

An asymmetric matte (accent depth to right)

(Download)

A vs. B

(Download)