Comparing depth from motion with depth from binocular disparity.

Durgin, Frank H.; Proffítt, Dennis R.; Olson, Thomas J.; Reinke, Karen S.

doi:10.1037/0096-1523.21.3.679

Cited by 71 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 89 publications

(176 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At near viewing distances, they could have obtained some information about the object from motion parallax in addition to binocular disparity. However, this is unlikely, since disparity provides more reliable information than does motion parallax from small head movements (Durgin, Proffitt, Olson, & Reinke, 1995). At far viewing distances, the natural viewing condition had no advantages over photographic viewing, which indicates that the information in the frozen optic arrays of the pictures that were used was optimally exploited for the task.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compression of visual space in natural scenes and in their photographic counterparts

Hecht

Doorn

Koenderink

1999

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Classical theories of space perception posit continuous distortions of subjective space. These stand in contrast to the quantitatively and qualitatively different distortions experienced in space that is represented pictorially. Wechallenge several aspects of these theories. Comparing real-world objects with depictions of the same objects, we investigated to what extent distortions are introduced by the photographic medium. Comers of irregularly shaped buildings had to be judged in terms of the vertical dihedral angles subtended by two adjacent walls. Across all conditions, a robust effect of viewing distance was found: Buildingcomers appear to flatten out with distance. Moreover,depictions of comers produce remarkably similar results and should not receive a different theoretical treatment than do real-world scenes. The flattening of vertical angles cannot be explained by a linear distortion of the entire visual space. We suggest that, for natural scenes, compression of space is local and dependent on contextual information. Visually perceived depth in spatial arrangements has been studied within the context of two rather distinct frameworks. First, many theories of subjective space are based on the notion that perceived space is distorted in a uniform fashion and that a specific transformation can be found that describes the mapping relations between the Euclidean space of the world and our subjective space. Second, theories of spatial representation are concerned with distortions that arise in the process of representing space-mainly, the effects caused by pictorial rendition, such as projective distortions or the apparent flattening of the scene. In this study, we attempt to establish a relationship between the two frameworks by comparing judgments made in real scenes with judgments based on photographic renditions ofthe same scenes. Surprisingly, we found distortions to be very similar. We had observers judge the dihedral angles of building comers from a va-H

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compression of visual space in natural scenes and in their photographic counterparts

Hecht

Doorn

Koenderink

1999

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We used lateral head motions that were 1.5 times the interocular distance. It is possible that motion parallax would have been more effective if we had used larger lateral head motions, such as those used, for example, by Durgin et al (1995) which were 4 times the interocular distance. However, the difference between motionparallax-alone and stereopsis-alone conditions in the current experiment was very large and unlikely to be eliminated, even if we had used larger lateral head motions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Vertical disparity could also be a distance scaling factor when targets have a vertical extent (Mayhew and Longuet-Higgins 1982;Gillam and Lawergren 1983), which these LED stimuli did not. Several other studies (Durgin et al 1995;McKee and Taylor 2010) have, like ours, used conditions in which the room was lit. Both studies found that depth from disparity was far more veridical in a geometric sense than depth from motion parallax, with the Durgin et al study showing good distance scaling of the former as observation distance varied.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Depth Interval Estimates from Motion Parallax and Binocular Disparity beyond Interaction Space

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Static and dynamic observers provided binocular and monocular estimates of the depths between real objects lying well beyond interaction space. On each trial, pairs of LEDs were presented inside a dark railway tunnel. The nearest LED was always 40 m from the observer, with the depth separation between LED pairs ranging from 0 up to 248 m. Dynamic binocular viewing was found to produce the greatest (ie most veridical) estimates of depth magnitude, followed next by static binocular viewing, and then by dynamic monocular viewing. (No significant depth was seen with static monocular viewing.) We found evidence that both binocular and monocular dynamic estimates of depth were scaled for the observation distance when the ground plane and walls of the tunnel were visible up to the nearest LED. We conclude that both motion parallax and stereopsis provide useful long-distance depth information and that motion parallax information can enhance the degree of stereoscopic depth seen.

show abstract

“…Thus, two views of four noncoplanar points are sufficient for some perceptual tasks like rigidity judgments (subsequently also shown to be possible mathematically by Bennett, Hoffman, Nicola, & Prakash, 1989, and, independently, by Huang & Lee, 1989. Experiments with other phenomena such as the stereokinetic effect, motion parallax, and depth from disparity also suggest that the human visual system is able to derive estimates of depth magnitudes in situations where it seems impossible on the basis of the laws of projective geometry alone (e.g., Caudek & Proffitt, 1993;Durgin, Proffitt, Olson, & Reinke, 1995;Proffitt, Rock, Hecht, & Schubert, 1992).…”

Section: Human Performance Versus Mathematical Constraintsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Minimal information to determine affine shape equivalence.

Wagemans¹,

Gool²,

Troy³

et al. 2000

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Participants judged the affine equivalence of 2 simultaneously presented 4-point patterns. Performance level (d') varied between 1.5 and 2.7, depending on the information available for solving the correspondence problem (insufficient in Experiment 1a, superfluous in Experiment 1b, and minimal in Experiments 1c, 2a, 2b) and on the exposure time (unlimited in Experiments 1 and 2a and 500 ms in Experiment 2b), but it did not vary much with the complexity of the affine transformation (rotation and slant in Experiment 1 and same plus tilt in Experiment 2). Performance in Experiment 3 was lower with 3-point patterns than with 4-point patterns, whereas blocking the trials according to the affine transformation parameters had little effect. Determining affine shape equivalence with minimal-information displays is based on a fast assessment of qualitatively or quasi-invariant properties such as convexity/ concavity, parallelism, and collinearity.

show abstract

Comparing depth from motion with depth from binocular disparity.

Cited by 71 publications

References 89 publications

Compression of visual space in natural scenes and in their photographic counterparts

Compression of visual space in natural scenes and in their photographic counterparts

Depth Interval Estimates from Motion Parallax and Binocular Disparity beyond Interaction Space

Minimal information to determine affine shape equivalence.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About