Shedding Light: A Benchmark for Evaluating Lighting Understanding in Generative Image Models
Updated 2 h ago · first seen 11 Sept 2026
paper_01M294H1NQEY47WW1PC6XQVAZ9
- Published
- 11 Sept 2026
- T1 · 2 h ago
- arXiv
- 2609.10787
- T1 · 2 h ago
- Category
- cs.CV
- T1 · 2 h ago
Abstract
Accurate modelling of illumination is central to realistic image synthesis and scene understanding. Yet, there is little exploration into whether image generative models are good at this task or whether physical plausibility remains a key challenge for them. Clearly, significant progress has been made in realistic image synthesis, but do models truly understand lighting in a physically accurate manner? To answer this question, this work proposes a benchmark to assess the lighting understanding and harmonisation capabilities of generative models. Our key insight is that evaluating lighting understanding for such models only requires testing how well they insert novel objects into real photographs whilst maintaining consistent illumination. To do so, we use a multi-illumination dataset with images containing simple objects serving as ``light probes'', and prompt models to inpaint the same object onto the original image, then compare the generated results against the ground-truth light probes. We then estimate the lighting direction, colour and radiance distribution from the inpainted probes, providing a quantitative measure of illumination accuracy and photometric realism. Our work establishes a scalable evaluation protocol to systematically assess how well generative models capture and reproduce real-world lighting, offering a foundation for benchmarking the photometric accuracy of any future models. All code and data are available at https://lvsn.github.io/SheddingLight/ .
Authors 5
Justine Giroux, Jack Oliver Hilliard, Yannick Hold-Geoffroy, Javier Vazquez-Corral, Jean-Fran\c{c}ois Lalonde
Specification
- Official page
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 2 h agohigh
- Arxiv announce type
- new
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 2 h agohigh
- arXiv id
- 2609.10787
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 2 h agohigh
- Categories
- cs.CV
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 2 h agohigh
- DOI
- 10.1145/3842579
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 2 h agohigh
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 2 h agohigh
- Primary category
- cs.CV
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 2 h agohigh
- Published
- 11 Sept 2026
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 2 h agohigh
Each value shows its source, tier and observation time. Conflicting claims are kept side by side and flagged — never averaged. How AI Atlas records facts →
Provenance
Attributed facts
10
Source tiers
T110
Freshest observation
2 h ago
Conflicts
None
No models linked to this paper yet.
As of
Rewind the record: see this entity's attributes exactly as AI Atlas knew them on a given day.
Claim history · Abstract
Abstractabstract1
| Value | Valid from → to | Status | Source | Confidence | Extractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accurate modelling of illumination is central to realistic image synthesis and scene understanding. Yet, there is little exploration into whether image generative models are good at this task or whether physical plausibility remains a key challenge for them. Clearly, significant progress has been made in realistic image synthesis, but do models truly understand lighting in a physically accurate manner? To answer this question, this work proposes a benchmark to assess the lighting understanding and harmonisation capabilities of generative models. Our key insight is that evaluating lighting understanding for such models only requires testing how well they insert novel objects into real photographs whilst maintaining consistent illumination. To do so, we use a multi-illumination dataset with images containing simple objects serving as ``light probes'', and prompt models to inpaint the same object onto the original image, then compare the generated results against the ground-truth light probes. We then estimate the lighting direction, colour and radiance distribution from the inpainted probes, providing a quantitative measure of illumination accuracy and photometric realism. Our work establishes a scalable evaluation protocol to systematically assess how well generative models capture and reproduce real-world lighting, offering a foundation for benchmarking the photometric accuracy of any future models. All code and data are available at https://lvsn.github.io/SheddingLight/ . | → current | current | arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1 | high | deterministic |
Claims are temporal and append-only: a new observation closes the previous claim (valid_to) instead of overwriting it. Conflicting claims from different sources are kept side by side and flagged — never averaged. Methodology →
- New paperPaperShedding Light: A Benchmark for Evaluating Lighting Understanding in Generative Image Models
New paper: Shedding Light: A Benchmark for Evaluating Lighting Understanding in Generative Image Models
arxiv
| Source | Document | Type | Tier | Last observed | Snapshots |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| arXiv (Atom API + RSS) | rss.arxiv.org/rss/cs.CV | feed | T1· Official | 1 min ago | 1 |
Tier 1 = official/primary, 2 = quality secondary, 3 = community, 4 = unverified. Every snapshot is archived; see all sources and the methodology.