This case study is an initial exploration as to whether the depiction of texture in a set of portraits, all portraying the same Sitter, is related to the familiar likeness assessments reported in a companion paper containing a principal component analysis (PCA) of the portraits’ depiction of shape. Somewhat unexpectedly, a texture PCA failed to discriminate the high from low likeness portraits, despite experimentation with different pre-processing methods to reduce the portraits’ high level of uninformative, image-level texture variability. There were some findings arising from these analyses, and while only indicative at this stage, include that linear histogram matching is effective in reducing variability in portrait brightness; that depicting, and perhaps exaggerating, shading relating to lighting direction may enhance portrait likeness; and, that whether minimised or exaggerated, lighting direction can be portrayed somewhat anomalously. Furthermore, and in agreement with findings from photographs, shape and texture were not found to be independent variables, and shape-free image registration, while very usefully enabling a comparison of closely corresponding pixel coordinate values, could itself be a confounding factor for undertaking a texture PCA with portraits produced under relatively ambient conditions.
AndrewsT. J.BaselerH.JenkinsR.BurtonA. M.YoungA. W. (2016).
Contributions of feature shapes and surface cues to the recognition and neural representation of facial identity. Cortex,
83, 280–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2016.08.008
2.
ArnheimR. (1974). Art and visual perception: A psychology of the creative eye.
University of California Press.
3.
BartlettM. S.HagerJ. C.EkmanP.SejnowskiT. J. (1999).
Measuring facial expressions by computer image analysis. Psychophysiology,
36, 253–263. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0048577299971664
4.
BensonP. J.PerrettD. I. (1991).
Perception and recognition of photographic quality facial caricatures: Implications for the recognition of natural images. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,
3, 105–135.
5.
BruceV.HannaE.DenchN.HealeyP.BurtonM. (1992).
The importance of ‘mass’ in line drawings of faces. Applied Cognitive Psychology,
6, 619–628. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2350060705
BurtonA. M.JenkinsR.HancockP. J.WhiteD. (2005).
Robust representations for face recognition: The power of averages. Cognitive Psychology,
51, 256–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2005.06.003
8.
BurtonA. M.MillerP.BruceB.HancockP. J. B.HendersonZ. (2001).
Human and automatic face recognition: A comparison across image formats. Vision Research,
41, 3185–3195. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0042-6989(01)00186-9
9.
BurtonA. M.SchweinbergerS. R.JenkinsR.KaufmannJ. M. (2015).
Arguments against a configural processing account of familiar face recognition. Perspectives on Psychological Science,
10, 482–496. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615583129
10.
CasatiR.CavanaghP. (2019). The visual world of shadows.
MIT Press.
CavanaghP.LeclercY. G. (1989).
Shape from shadows. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance,
15, 3–27.
13.
CrawI.CameronP. (1992). Face recognition by computer. In Hogg D., Boyle R. (eds) BMVC92: British machine vision conference (pp. 498–507).
Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3201-1_52
14.
DaviesG.EllisH. D.ShepherdJ. (1978).
Face recognition accuracy as a function of mode of representation. Journal of Applied Psychology,
63, 180. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.63.2.180
15.
GalperR. E. (1970).
Recognition of faces in photographic negative. Psychonomic Science,
19, 207–208.
HancockP. J.BurtonA. M.BruceV. (1996).
Face processing: Human perception and principal components analysis. Memory and Cognition,
24, 21–40. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197270
21.
HayesS.CaputiP.ZaracostasT.HendersonM.TelentaJ.McCombeE.ChristopherK.CalvertE.AbbatiD.SmithO.MedwellE.WilcockJ. (2020).
Likeness, familiarity, and the ambient portrait average. Perception,
49, 567–587. https://doi.org/10.1177/0301006620905420
22.
Hayes, S., Rheinberger, N., Powley, M., Rawnsley, T., Brown, L., Brown, M., Butler, K., Clarke, A., Crichton, S., Henderson, M., McCosker, H., Musgrave, A., Wilcock, J., Williams, D., Yeaman, K., Zaracostas, T. S., Taylor, A. C., & Wallace, G. (2018, Jun). Variation and Likeness in Ambient Artistic Portraiture. Perception, 47(6), 585–607. https://doi.org/10.1177/0301006618770347
23.
ItzM. L.SchweinbergerS. R.SchulzC.KaufmannJ. M. (2014).
Neural correlates of facilitations in face learning by selective caricaturing of facial shape or reflectance. Neuroimage,
102, 736–747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.08.042
24.
JenkinsR.BurtonA. M. (2011).
Stable face representations. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences,
366, 1671–1683. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0379
25.
JohnstonA.HillH.CarmanN. (1992).
Recognising faces: Effects of lighting direction, inversion, and brightness reversal. Perception,
21, 365–375. https://doi.org/10.1068/p210365
26.
KempR.PikeG.WhiteP.MusselmanA. (1996).
Perception and recognition of normal and negative faces: The role of shape from shading and pigmentation cues. Perception,
25, 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1068/p250037
27.
KirbyM.SirovichL. (1990).
Application of the Karhunen-Loeve procedure for the characterization of human faces. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence,
12, 103–108. https://doi.org/10.1109/34.41390
28.
KramerR. S.JenkinsR.BurtonA. M. (2017).
InterFace: A software package for face image warping, averaging, and principal components analysis. Behavior Research Methods,
49, 2002–2011. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0837-7
29.
LeeK. J.PerrettD. I. (2000).
Manipulation of colour and shape information and its consequence upon recognition and best-likeness judgments. Perception,
29, 1291–1312. https://doi.org/10.1068/p2792
MaughanW. L. (2004). The artist's complete guide to drawing the head.
Watson-Guptill.
32.
MoonH.PhillipsP. J. (2001).
Computational and performance aspects of PCA-based face-recognition algorithms. Perception,
30, 303–321. https://doi.org/10.1068/p2896
33.
NestorA.PlautD. C.BehrmannM. (2013).
Face-space architectures: Evidence for the use of independent color-based features. Psychological Science,
24, 1294–1300. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612464889
34.
OstrovskyY.CavanaghP.SinhaP. (2005).
Perceiving illumination inconsistencies in scenes. Perception,
34, 1301–1314.
35.
O'TooleA. J.PriceT.VetterT.BartlettJ. C.BlanzV. (1999).
3D shape and 2D surface textures of human faces: The role of “averages” in attractiveness and age. Image and Vision Computing,
18, 9–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0262-8856(99)00012-8
RohlfF. J. (2015).
The tps series of software. Hystrix, the Italian Journal of Mammalogy,
26, 9–12.
38.
RussellR.BiedermanI.NederhouserM.SinhaP. (2007).
The utility of surface reflectance for the recognition of upright and inverted faces. Vision Research,
47, 157–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2006.11.002
39.
RussellR.SinhaP. (2007).
Real-world face recognition: The importance of surface reflectance properties. Perception,
36, 1368–1374.
40.
SchindelinJ.Arganda-CarrerasI.FriseE.KaynigV.LongairM.PietzschT.PreibischS.RuedenC.SaalfeldS.SchmidB.TinevezJ.-Y.WhiteD. J.HartensteinV.EliceiriK.TomancakP.CardonaA. (2012).
Fiji: An open-source platform for biological-image analysis. Nature Methods,
9, 676–682. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2019
41.
SedgewickJ. (2010). Scientific imaging with Photoshop: Methods, measurement, and output.
Peachpit Press.
42.
SirovichL.KirbyM. (1987).
Low-dimensional procedure for the characterization of human faces. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, Optics and Image Science,
4, 519–524. https://doi.org/10.1364/josaa.4.000519
43.
SmithS. W. (1997). The scientist and engineer’s guide to digital signal processing.
California Technical Publishing. http://www.dspguide.com
44.
SpeedH. (1917). The practice and science of drawing (3rd ed.).
Dover.
45.
StorkD. G. (2011, January). Computer analysis of lighting style in fine art: Steps towards inter-artist studies [Paper presentation]. Electronic Imaging: Computer Vision and Image Analysis of Art II, (Vol 7869), San Francisco, CA, United States: SPIE.
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
