---

name: siggraph-topic-selection description: Use before committing a project to SIGGRAPH / SIGGRAPH Asia / TOG, to decide whether the contribution is graphics-shaped and which venue and track fit, routing among SIGGRAPH, SIGGRAPH Asia, direct-to-TOG, and siblings (CVPR/ICCV, CHI/UIST, Eurographics/EGSR/SGP/SCA/HPG/I3D), and whether to aim dual-track or Journal-only.

SIGGRAPH Topic Selection

Choosing SIGGRAPH — and the right cycle and track — before you write is a high-leverage decision, because SIGGRAPH's bar is a graphics contribution shown through results, and several sibling venues will serve a differently-shaped contribution better. This skill routes the project. Anchor venue facts to resources/official-source-map.md.

Is it a graphics contribution?

SIGGRAPH rewards work that advances how images, geometry, motion, or interactive experiences are created, simulated, rendered, captured, or fabricated — and demonstrates it on results a graphics audience can see. Apply three tests:

1. The visual/temporal-result test. Can the contribution be shown as an image, mesh, frame sequence, or interactive demo that a graphics reviewer judges by eye? If the payoff is a table of accuracy numbers with nothing to show, it is likely a vision or ML paper.
2. The capability-axis test. Does it move a graphics axis — quality, speed, generality, robustness, controllability? If there is no such axis, the contribution is not yet SIGGRAPH-shaped.
3. The method-vs-application test. Is the advance a reusable technique, or an application of an existing method to a new dataset? The latter routes to a domain venue or a shorter track.

Route the project

If the contribution is...	Consider	Why not SIGGRAPH main
A graphics technique with strong visual results	SIGGRAPH / SIGGRAPH Asia Technical Papers (TOG)	This is the target
Rendering-specific, incremental but solid	EGSR or HPG (and TOG)	Better-matched reviewers; faster cycle
Geometry-processing-specific	SGP (and TOG/CGF)	Specialized geometry audience
Animation / physical simulation focused	SCA (and TOG)	Sub-community venue
Interactive/real-time rendering technique	I3D or HPG	Real-time-focused reviewers
Recognition/reconstruction where the model is the point	CVPR / ICCV / ECCV	A vision contribution, not a graphics one
Interaction/UI/hardware where usability is the point	CHI / UIST	An HCI contribution
A mature, comprehensive result with no conference talk needed	Direct-to-TOG (rolling)	Journal-only, off-cycle
Early-stage but promising graphics idea	SIGGRAPH Conference track (dual-track) or Technical Communications	Lighter validation bar

The neural-rendering / generative-3D overlap with CVPR is the most common routing decision: if the lesson survives swapping the network (a graphics capability), aim SIGGRAPH; if the network is the contribution and the graphics is a testbed, aim a vision venue.

Choose the cycle

• SIGGRAPH (North America), ~January deadline, summer conference vs SIGGRAPH Asia, ~May deadline, December conference. Same TOG journal outcome, same review model — pick by which deadline your results can finish to the journal bar, and by conference travel.
• A near-miss at one cycle is naturally revised for the next; do not rush an unfinished paper into the nearer deadline.
• Direct-to-TOG (rolling, ScholarOne) suits a comprehensive journal paper that does not need a conference talk; most authors still go through the conference cycle for the presentation and visibility.

Choose the track

• Dual-track (default): eligible for Journal (TOG) or Conference publication; keeps the lighter-validation Conference outcome available for riskier/earlier-stage work. The committee assigns the final track — you cannot appeal it (see siggraph-review-process).
• Journal-only: choose when a Conference-track publication would not serve a mature, complete result. This forgoes the lighter-validation safety net.
• You do not choose between journal and conference reviewers — there is one review on one scale; the track is decided at accept time.

Honest self-check before committing

• Do I have a results video and head-to-head comparisons against the strongest prior method, or can I produce them by the deadline? Without them, SIGGRAPH is a long shot.
• Is the closest prior work at SIGGRAPH, or at Eurographics/EGSR/SGP/SCA/CVPR? Submit where your reviewers and canon live.
• Is the contribution a reusable technique or a one-off result? The former is SIGGRAPH-shaped.

Output format

[Graphics-shaped?] visual-result / capability-axis / method-vs-application tests: pass/fail
[Venue] SIGGRAPH / SIGGRAPH Asia / TOG-direct / sibling (name it) + why
[Cycle] which deadline the results can credibly finish to
[Track] dual-track / journal-only + rationale
[Readiness] results video + strongest-baseline comparison in hand or schedulable? yes/no
[Route decision] <one line + next skill to invoke>