All threads

All of the threads for this selected topic

Are there certain pictorial depth cues that are more effective than others? Why are they more effective?

1 reply | 1 unread

Gilchrist argues that perceived lightness depends on perceived spatial arrangement; how is this perception affected by different ranges of luminance? And how does motion affect perceived lightness?​

1 reply | 1 unread

1. In one of Pawan Sinha's classes we talked about how various receptor fields of neurons work to form a representation of real world features like lines edges, if it's true that there exist networks of that sort then how does Purves et al theory of empirical model of vision account for the biological need for such neural networks ? If the higher order features are also dependent on our historical responses to proximal stimulus then does that mean people have different pathways for representing higher features ? 2. In purves et al paper - in the section on spectral returns and color, the empirical explanation seems to imply that a reaction to color contrasts/differences is all based on historical experience of the stimuli. Does that hold true for people with newly acquired vision ? What if they had limited exposure to various colors/contrasts. How does this theory hold for people with color blindness ?

1 reply

If Purves et al. are right in that visual perception is based on statistical learning, then to what extent is it possible to bias or mold our own visual experience (i.e. forcing certain interpretations over others)? How can we study this in infants or in Prakash children, who have “less data” in that sense? How can we create art that exploits this statistical interpretation?

3 replies | 3 unread

In-class synopsis

3 replies | 3 unread

Welcome to the forum for module 3 discussion! Please post questions by 5pm Sunday 10/6. Feel free to discuss questions that have already been posted.

3 replies | 3 unread

Can we propose a system of transformations to talk about motion based changes in the pictorial space (example 2D animations) like in the guage fields paper.

0 replies

While Purves et al paper makes arguments for empirical development of vision perception, I am curious whether we have evolutionary knowledge passed on from generation to generation that contribute to our vision perception for the sake of survival.

0 replies

When given a stimuli with a given color and illumination (for example, a yellow square under white light), humans can determine the material’s color and material’s illumination. Although that assessment may be incorrect, do we have default “go-to” illumination sources ? (i.e. do humans innately assume the square is yellow under a white light or white under a yellow light?).

0 replies

​With regards to the Purves et al. reading, when discussing the relationship of object motion and perceived motion it is mentioned that a solution to perceiving motion could be the accumulation of experience by interacting with moving objects, in a way that motion gradually comes together with the statistics of the possible displacements underlying the stimulus. Would it be possible to create "visual illusions" that alter the perception of this motion in a way that allows us to train an animal to have displacement statistics that are not up to par with the correct displacement of the object? Could this serve as a strategy to verify if this is a mechanism through which animals and humans perceive motion?

0 replies

In one of Pawan Sinha's classes we talked about how various receptor fields of neurons work to form a representation of real world features like lines edges, if it's true that there exist networks of that sort then how does Purves et al theory of empirical model of vision account for the biological need for such neural networks ? If the higher order features are also dependent on our historical responses to proximal stimulus then does that mean people have different pathways for representing higher features ?

0 replies

With regards to light constancy, humans perceive different luminance values of a material when presented with different spatial arrangements according to the corresponding paper. Do humans have "default settings" when attempting to perceive depth verses luminance? Is one always determined first (which then influences the interpretation of the other) or is it scenario dependent?

0 replies

What might our immediate recognition for stimuli with pictorial relief suggest about humans' perception of depth? How does the idea of pictorial relief apply to everyday visual processing?

0 replies

In the excerpt from Interaction of Color, Albers discusses optical illusions that rely on after-images that arise due to cone fatigue. Why would humans have evolved this mechanism when it leads to an incorrect perception of the world around us? How can artists make use of this deceptive feature to enhance our experience of their art?

0 replies

To what extent can we predict one's subjective experience of depth when viewing elements of the pictorial plane? What techniques do we use to predict this?

0 replies

If visual perception is influenced by prior experience, then is it true that there are visual "accents" across human beings since people have different prior visual experience? And is this the reason why people sometimes perceive objects differently (e.g. the internet dress)? Is it possible to acquire new visual "accents" by new exposure?

0 replies

From Purves paper “the visual system generates percepts based entirely on the historical significance of proximal stimuli.”…“fundamentally different from...that visual perception is based on a ‘readout’ of the firing rates of ‘neuronal detectors’ of the various attributes of the stimuli that fall on the retina.” 1)Does the visual perception have to be based on one hypothesis over the other? In class, Pawan showed us the train tracks with the two lines on top of them, and he mentioned that people who just regained their sight had the same visual perception we had looking at a similar picture without any past experiences. 2)Can some aspects of perceptions be biologically innate or genetically inherited and not just learned? 3)If some aspects of perceptions are genetically inherited, can visual perception be different, among people who just regained their sight, without visual past experiences? 4)Are there other non-visual stimuli (touch) that can affect how we visually perceive things?

0 replies

Active thread

Only the replies to the one thread you selected
Hoags Object: McGurk effect