This person works in art and design within the field of computer graphics. They may be familiar with techniques for 3D printing, animation, video production, digital illustration, and graphic arts.
This person may work in the movie industry or in advertising. They are responsible for ensuring the production designer’s creative vision for all the special effects that eventually give a film its visual identity.
This person has strong computer graphics skills and in-depth working knowledge of several core graphics engine systems perhaps for animation, rendering or audio/multimodal interaction. They may work in the games industry or in film production.
This person works for a company specializing in computer graphics or interaction hardware/software. They develop state-of-the-art industrially applicable novel algorithms for displays, visual, haptic, auditory rendering. This person is very technical.
This person develops algorithms for use in computer graphics, they may develop open source systems, user interface tools, mobile apps or 3D web or VR applications.
This person is head of a computer graphics research lab at a well known university. They have expertise in a wide range of computer graphics specific topics. They teach and guide research. They have a number of people working in their team. They might specialize in technical algorithms or have an art and design focus depending on their expertise.
This person may work in movies, games or another tech-related industry. They are responsible for leading and guiding teams and work with both artists and technologists. They have an in-depth understanding of how different skill sets come together to form a final project.
In previous years, these guidelines said “after the review process, destroy all copies of papers and videos that are not returned to the senior reviewer and erase any implementations you have written to evaluate the ideas in the papers, as well as any results of those implementations.”
However, in 2012, SIGGRAPH introduced a new process for revised papers that were rejected from a previous SIGGRAPH conference, where the authors can choose to release the previous reviewers’ names, so that the same reviewers can be reassigned. Therefore, there is a chance that you will be asked in the future to review such a resubmission, and may need your notes, marked manuscripts, or implementations. So you may keep them if necessary, but please be careful to insulate the ideas you learned from the review from your own research, and from your colleagues and students. Also, please be aware that your reviews may be perused by other future SIGGRAPH reviewers.