Online system rates images by aesthetic quality

May 5, 2009,

( -- An online photo-rating system developed at Penn State is the first publicly available tool for automatically determining the aesthetic value of an image, according to a Penn State researcher involved with the project.

James Z. Wang, associate professor of information sciences and technology, is one of the principal researchers on the Aesthetic Quality Inference Engine (ACQUINE), a system that judges the aesthetic quality of digital images. Wang said this tool is a significant first step in recognizing human emotional reaction to visual stimulus.

ACQUINE, which has been in development since 2005 and was launched in April 2009, can be found online at . Users can upload their own images for rating or test the system by providing a link to any image online. The system provides an aesthetic rating within seconds.

Wang said the system extracts and uses visual aspects such as color saturation, color distribution and photo composition to give any uploaded image a rating from zero to 100. The system learns to associate these aspects with the way humans rate photos based on thousands of previously-rated photographs in online photo-sharing Web sites such as

"In its current form, we've seen more than 80 percent consistency between the human and computer ratings," Wang said. "The improvements to the system that are currently under development show promise to get even higher performance.

"Furthermore, aesthetics represents just one dimension of human emotion. Future systems will perhaps strive to capture other emotions that pictures arouse in people," he said.

According to Wang, there also are opportunities to link the rating system directly to cameras so that when a photo is taken, the photographer can instantly see how it might be perceived by the public.

Wang worked with Ritendra Datta, a recent Penn State Ph.D. recipient and Jia Li, associate professor of statistics at Penn State. Funding for this project was provided by the National Science Foundation as part of ongoing research about the relationship between computers and visual concepts. The researchers previously used similar technology to detect authentic Vincent van Gogh paintings.

Provided by Penn State

Explore further: New software 'teaches' computers how to identify beauty

Related Stories

New software 'teaches' computers how to identify beauty

June 5, 2006

Beauty is no longer just in the eye of the beholder-computers "taught" to evaluate photographs can match people's aesthetic judgments of "beautiful" or "pretty" more than 70 percent of the time, according to Penn State researchers.

Researchers teach computers how to name images by 'thinking'

November 1, 2006

Penn State researchers have "taught" computers how to interpret images using a vocabulary of up to 330 English words, so that a computer can describe a photograph of two polo players, for instance, as "sport," "people," "horse," ...

Researchers detect fake art from originals

July 9, 2008

As museums continue to digitize their art collections, it becomes increasingly easier for paintings to be forged. Two Penn State researchers are part of an international team working on a digital system to help detect original ...

Intelligent Computers See Your Human Traits

May 29, 2008

Today’s computers can do a lot as far as computation goes, but they tend to do it in an impersonal, stand-offish way, so to speak. However, computer engineers are busy changing that, as they try to give computers a bit ...

Recommended for you

Female golden snub-nosed monkeys share nursing of young

February 21, 2019

An international team of researchers including The University of Western Australia and China's Central South University of Forestry and Technology has discovered that female golden snub-nosed monkeys in China are happy to ...

When does one of the central ideas in economics work?

February 20, 2019

The concept of equilibrium is one of the most central ideas in economics. It is one of the core assumptions in the vast majority of economic models, including models used by policymakers on issues ranging from monetary policy ...

In colliding galaxies, a pipsqueak shines bright

February 20, 2019

In the nearby Whirlpool galaxy and its companion galaxy, M51b, two supermassive black holes heat up and devour surrounding material. These two monsters should be the most luminous X-ray sources in sight, but a new study using ...

Research reveals why the zebra got its stripes

February 20, 2019

Why do zebras have stripes? A study published in PLOS ONE today takes us another step closer to answering this puzzling question and to understanding how stripes actually work.


Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

not rated yet May 05, 2009
I tried it on the mandelbrot set, it got 70.
I tried it on a horse wang, it scored 17.

Seemed to work like a charm, but then I tried a particularly gross looking cow-pie and it scored a 51.
not rated yet May 05, 2009
Maybe it was a particularly well composed picture of a cow-pie.
not rated yet May 05, 2009
I uploaded a nice picture of my relative and it scored 16. What's the point of this?
not rated yet May 05, 2009
It doesn't rate how good a person looks. It rates how good the picture looks.
5 / 5 (1) May 05, 2009
It's like judging the quality of art, music, etc. There are qualitative things that can separate good art from less than professional art, but much of what we appreciate in a song or a picture is subjective.

I tried uploading a few pictures and was disappointed in the results. Try, instead, looking through their random selections and you will surely see pictures that you like which are poorly rated.

Since different people will like different things and give widely different ratings on pictures, by having software analyze the results of a human "poll" grading the quality a set of pictures, you are left with a very confused algorithm which can only predict the AVERAGE rating that a group of humans would give to a picture.

It is the same problem with politicians following opinion polls too closely, or a person placing too much credence in what others think: the result is often chaos and confusion. A person must follow his or her own best judgement, and since this photo rating system cannot (yet) think for itself, it cannot truly make credible selections.

In addition, even if it COULD think, it would often come up with different results than each of us. People seldom agree completely on what is good or bad art.

What I think is important here is that they are improving the ability of software to analyze photos based on prescribed criteria. The Google Similar Pictures experiment could benefit from more research in this field. I have yet to see it present me with pictures that I would consider to be similar to the one that I start out with. I always end up getting more pictures from the same website or with similar captions.
not rated yet May 06, 2009
lol, the science of horse wang analysis has broken new ground today!
not rated yet May 06, 2009
Rated a Mona Lisa as a 100; drew a white mustache and spectacles upon it with paint program and it garnered a rating of, well, 100.

Leonardo 100; Leonardo with graffiti 100; Program 0.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.