Method for comparing photographer aesthetic quality
A method for comparing a plurality of photographers by assessing the aesthetic quality of a set of digital images captured by each photographer comprising: providing a set of digital images captured by each of a plurality of photographers; using a processor to determine an aesthetic quality parameter for each digital image in each of the sets of digital images, wherein the aesthetic quality parameter is an estimate for the aesthetic quality of the digital image; determining an aesthetic quality distribution for each photographer responsive to the aesthetic quality parameters computed for each of the digital images in the photographer's set of digital images; and providing a comparison between the aesthetic quality distributions of the photographers.
1. A method for comparing a plurality of photographers by assessing the aesthetic quality of a set of digital images captured by each photographer comprising:
a) providing a set of digital images captured by each of a plurality of photographers;
b) using a processor to determine an aesthetic quality parameter for each digital image in each of the sets of digital images, wherein the aesthetic quality parameter is an estimate for the aesthetic quality of the digital image;
c) determining an aesthetic quality distribution for each photographer responsive to the aesthetic quality parameters computed for each of the digital images in the photographer's set of digital images; and
d) providing a comparison between the aesthetic quality distributions of the photographers.
2. The method of claim 1 wherein the digital images in the sets of digital images are captured within a specified time interval.
3. The method of claim 1 wherein the aesthetic quality parameter for a digital image is determined by:
i) determining one or more vanishing point(s) associated with the digital image by automatically analyzing the digital image;
ii) computing a compositional model from at least the positions of the vanishing point(s);
iii) computing the aesthetic quality parameter for the input digital image responsive to the compositional model.
4. The method of claim 3 wherein the aesthetic quality parameter produced in step iii) is further responsive to at least one of the following additional features that are computed from the input digital image: face location, face contrast, face brightness, face size, colorfulness, number of hues, color distribution, sharpness, edge spatial distribution, location of main subject, or size of main subject.
5. The method of claim 1 wherein the aesthetic quality distribution is a probability density function.
6. The method of claim 1 wherein step d) includes displaying the aesthetic quality distributions of at least two photographers via a graphical user interface.
7. The method of claim 1 wherein step d) includes determining a mean aesthetic quality value for each photographer from the aesthetic quality distributions, and displaying the mean aesthetic quality values via a graphical user interface.
8. The method of claim 1 wherein step d) includes determining a maximum aesthetic quality value for each photographer from the aesthetic quality distributions, and displaying the maximum aesthetic quality values via a graphical user interface.
9. The method of claim 1 wherein step d) includes ranking the photographers by comparing the aesthetic quality distributions for the photographers and displaying a list of the photographers ordered according to the ranking via a graphical user interface.
10. The method of claim 9 wherein the photographers are ranked by determining an average aesthetic quality value for each photographer from the aesthetic quality distributions and sorting the average aesthetic quality values.
11. The method of claim 9 wherein the displayed list of photographers includes an image of each photographer.
12. The method of claim 9 wherein the displayed list of photographers includes a representative image from each photographer.
13. The method of claim 1 wherein aesthetic quality distributions for each photographer are determined for two different time intervals and further including producing an indication of each photographer's progress toward producing images with a high level of aesthetic quality by comparing the aesthetic quality distributions for the two different time intervals.
14. The method of claim 1 , wherein the plurality of photographers are a set of people linked in a social network, and wherein the comparison between the aesthetic quality distributions of the photographers is shared using an online social network.
15. The method of claim 1 , wherein the plurality of photographers are students in a photography class.
16. The method of claim 1 wherein the sets of digital images are provided using a digital communications network.
17. The method of claim 1 wherein the sets of digital images include frames from one or more video sequences.