The Racial Character of Computer Graphics Research

Computer graphics algorithms for generating photorealistic imagery are widely perceived to be universal, and capable of conjuring anything that a filmmaker or game designer can imagine. However, recent works have suggested that 3D algorithms for depicting synthetic humans are far from generic, and instead favor historically hegemonic characteristics. We present the first systematic review of human depiction in the top computer graphics conference and the journal of record (SIGGRAPH and ACM Transactions on Graphics) that confirms previous hypotheses. Algorithms that claim to be generically rendering "human skin'' are in fact imagined and formulated for translucent, "high albedo" materials such as white skin. Algorithms claiming to apply generically to "human hair" are formulated for "rods", "wires" and "threads" which are analogous to straight hair. Our analysis reveals conceptual binarization, where algorithms for white skin are treated as computational substrate for "all" skin, imposing a hierarchical assumption that all skin descends from the math and physics of white skin. Hair algorithms follow a similar historical pattern, with the first examples of computer-generated Type 4 hair only appearing after the murder of George Floyd in 2020. We offer a new conceptual label, McDaniels Methods, for characterizing and critiquing computer graphics algorithms that reinforce racial hierarchy under a false cover of diversity. We also offer an inverse label, Durald Methods, for algorithms that were closely co-designed with the people being depicted. Our analysis points the way towards several neglected avenues for future research.