Submission Resources

Where do I start?

Resources for Writing Submissions

Submitting a talk to a conference can be intimidating but we’re here to help! We’ve put together some tips and advice from seasoned reviewers, and a few links to other helpful resources.

Where Do I Start?

So you did some amazing work that you want to share with the DigiPro community. Yay! Now what? The process of submitting to DigiPro starts with the submission page. There you’ll find a description of the type of content DigiPro is looking for. Please read carefully and also take note of what we’re not looking for. If you have questions about whether your work falls under the DigiPro topic umbrella feel free to reach out to

On that page is a giant button that says “EASYCHAIR”. EasyChair is our platform for collecting and reviewing submissions. If you follow that link you’ll be taken to the DigiPro Login page. Once you’ve created an account and logged in you should see an Author section with “make a new submission” link. Feel free to click through to that form to see what you’ll need to fill in and upload for your submission.

You must have:

  • Name, email, and affiliation of all authors
  • Title and Abstract in plain text
  • Keywords
  • Details of previous presentations, if applicable
  • Paper submission in PDF format
  • One representative image for your work

Supplemental imagery and video are optional, but highly recommended.

Now that you know what you’ll need, it’s time to start gathering information and writing up your submission!

Submission Requirements

According to the Submission Page:

Submissions may take the form of a technical paper or an extended abstract with associated visual material. Novel proposals and formats are welcome, but submissions must provide sufficient technical detail to demonstrate relevance to the audience.

Let’s dive a little deeper, walking through the submission requirements.


Keep your title short, concise, and informative. Don’t get too clever or have a long-winded obscurely-worded title.


Keep your keyword list simple but thorough. If you’re not sure what your keywords should be take a look for examples on other publications related to your work (Yes! You absolutely should be reading other publications related to your work!)


Your Abstract is the first thing the reviewers read, it’s your First Impression. It should be a short, concise summary stating the driving force behind your work (the ‘why’) and an overview of the work itself (the ‘what’ and ‘how’). Nothing more.

The abstract should include a brief explanation of the problem, what is the motivation? Don’t go into too much detail here, save that for the paper itself.


This is where the good stuff goes! The paper portion of your submission can be either an extended abstract or full paper. If you choose to submit an extended abstract (often shorter than a full paper) then make sure to include plenty of supplemental video and supporting imagery. In both cases it is a good idea to start with a clear outline before starting to write. For inspiration check out the SIGGRAPH article How do I Structure a Paper.

What do Reviewers Look For

As you are preparing to write, consider the type of questions that reviewers will be asking as they read your paper:

  • Is this an interesting topic for this conference audience?
    • Do I want to see that talk?
    • Will the subject matter lead to further discussions?
  • Does the submission show potential for a quality presentation?
    • How easy is it to follow? Do I have to read it many times to understand?
    • Is it a well-structured submission? Does it tell a story?
    • Are there examples of use in production? Graphs? Supplemental Video?
  • How novel are the problems and/or solutions?

Advice from Reviewers


  • Discuss previous and related work.
    • What does your work contribute?
    • Include all references.
  • Consider how useful your idea is to others.
    • Are the challenges you faced specific to your workflow, and therefore irrelevant to others?
    • Can it be generalized?
  • Describe techniques in plain-language and avoid/explain obscure acronyms.
  • Include failures, false starts, and hindsight.
  • Discuss status of production adoption.
    • What was the impact of your work?
  • Diagrams are worth a thousand words! See resources below for creating diagrams.
  • Provide supplementary video and informative imagery.


  • Make a sales pitch or have a marketing presentation.
  • Use equations to explain a concept. Use your words and include equations as supporting content.
  • Submit work that is simply a reproduction of functionality in existing software. If you’ve rewritten a tool that Maya/Houdini/etc already provides then explain why.
  • Just provide pretty pictures. Make sure that supplemental imagery and video are informative and self-explanatory.
    • Does the image/video convey information without requiring an explanation?
  • Provide inconsistent, incomplete, and/or bloated reference entries.

Representative Image

At least one image is required for your submission, intended to be used for promotion purposes (e.g. as the primary image for the proceedings and the conference program). Verify that your Representative Image meets the following standards before you upload:

  • The recommended aspect ratio is 3x2 in landscape orientation.
  • At least 1500x1000 pixel resolution.
  • At least 300 dpi.
  • Must be in jpeg format.
  • 15MB max.

Supplemental Imagery/Video

As mentioned above, supplemental imagery and video are optional, but highly recommended. It’s difficult for reviewers to judge the content and quality level of a paper/talk from just text. Pictures really are worth a thousand words!

Reviewer Quotes

Show the Good and the Bad

The audience is just as interested in things that went wrong as things that went right. Your idea might have yielded good results in the long run, but what parts didn’t work so well? What are the limitations? What should you have done differently, with hindsight? Lessons from experience are hugely valuable to share.

Recognize Related Work

I [often] see work that is promoted as novel but without any recognition that similar tech exists out there and what aspects of this work are different and why. I don’t expect academic research paper levels of citations that go back decades, but if (just to pick a random topic) a studio talks about their fur system, I do expect them to have read previous DigiPro submissions on fur systems so they can talk about similarities and differences (and motivations for them).

Reviewers Don’t Know All The Things

Reviewers are unlikely to be experts in your field. We want to learn about your work but you have to give us some background. Imagine you’re explaining your work to a smart friend who only has peripheral knowledge of your area of expertise.

Non-English Speakers

We love getting submissions from all over the world, but admittedly it is sometimes difficult to review a paper that is written in English, but is not quite fluent English. If possible, please find a native English speaker to review your paper before submitting.

How to Get Your SIGGRAPH Paper rejected.

Creating diagrams:

Consider including an ORCID:

ACM Info

DigiPro is sponsored by ACM SIGGRAPH and accepted papers are published as the DigiPro Proceedings in the ACM Digital Library. If your paper is accepted, ACM requires fairly strict formatting rules for the text and references. That said, the requirements for DigiPro submissions are not as stringent as SIGGRAPH. There is no restriction or requirement on the number of pages, and the format outlined above is recommended but not required. Reviewers care about the content, not about the exact formatting.

Keeping that in mind, here are a few links with information about ACM publication and author’s rights.

Guide to Writing Your First ACM SIGGRAPH/TOG Paper.

DigiPro authors do fall under the umbrella of ACM authors with respect to rights and permissions. However, Author Rights as described above will apply only to the primary PDF. Anything else (videos, supplemental material) are covered by the Digital Artifact policy. If authors opt-in to having their presentations recorded for the ACM Digital Library, those will recordings will similarly be categorized as digital artifacts. Importantly, only the the primary PDF is behind the ACM Digital Library paywall unless the authors go the Open Access route. All other materials are always freely available.


LaTeX Editor:

ACM LaTeX Templates:

Last Words

Remember that the reviewers are your peers, and we’re excited to see what you’re working on. Have fun, and good luck!