Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Do Image Editors Follow Depth-Dependent Blur and Aperture Response? A Rendered-Ground-Truth Pilot Audit

General image editors are asked to make a photo look as if it were taken at f/1.4, yet it is rarely checked whether the blur they add follows thin-lens optics. A physical aperture edit spreads blur across depth in thin-lens proportions and changes the blur when the aperture changes; prior evaluations check blur monotonicity, sharpness-trend correlation, effective-aperture error, or vision-language judgments, and none we found reports the two properties separately at known depths. In this pilot audit of two editors (Gemini~3.1 Flash Image and GPT-image-2.5) we compare against a rendered oracle: Blender Cycles scenes with true thin-lens depth of field, one blur-width estimator applied ident...

AuthorsZhihan Chen, Yuhuan Zhao, Yijie Zhu et al.
Primary categorycs.CV
Published7 October 2026
Last updated at source7 October 2026
cs.CV
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/7376c5ed-32f7-4758-98b5-137ea5c5abef" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Popularity, last 2 days

0 now. Counts as reported by the source, snapshotted daily by Silytics.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.