1995
DOI: 10.1364/josaa.12.000017
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pictorial depth cues: a new slant

Abstract: Pictorial depth cues such as perspective projection, aspect ratio, and texture gradients can specify mathematically the slant of a planar surface. We performed experiments to measure the accuracy of human perception of surface slant from these cues. We calculated the perceived slant from judgments of the relative lengths of a pair of orthogonal lines embedded in the surface. Our results indicate that slant judgments are accurate to within 3 deg. This level of accuracy was achieved whether the cues were luminan… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
18
0

Year Published

1996
1996
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
1
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The observers in our Experiment 2 also exhibited underestimation when they judged the surface slants by using magnitude estimation (see Figure 8). The accurate judgments that were obtained in Experiment 1 (see Figure 3) for the three natural texture types (marble, granite, and pebbles) are therefore interesting, because accuracy in slant estimation has rarely been demonstrated in prior research (see, however, the results of Zimmerman, Legge, & Cavanagh, 1995). The results of Experiment 3 suggest that accommodative blur contributes to the perception of slant; when it was removed from the observers' retinal images, their perception of the surface slant decreased (see Figure 11).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…The observers in our Experiment 2 also exhibited underestimation when they judged the surface slants by using magnitude estimation (see Figure 8). The accurate judgments that were obtained in Experiment 1 (see Figure 3) for the three natural texture types (marble, granite, and pebbles) are therefore interesting, because accuracy in slant estimation has rarely been demonstrated in prior research (see, however, the results of Zimmerman, Legge, & Cavanagh, 1995). The results of Experiment 3 suggest that accommodative blur contributes to the perception of slant; when it was removed from the observers' retinal images, their perception of the surface slant decreased (see Figure 11).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…A body of evidence suggests that our visual system does this and that we assume that trapezoidal distortions are due to rotations in depth [41], [42], [43], [44], [45]. We are most familiar with this assumption when viewing the Ames Window (or trapezoid illusion: a frontoparallel trapezoid is interpreted as a rectangle in depth [46]), where the 3-D rectangle assumption causes the perception of non-rigid rotations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The various 3D surface cues such as luminance shading, linear perspective, aspect ratio of square objects, and texture gradient can each specify the slant of a planar surface. Zimmerman, Legge, and Cavanagh (1995), for example, performed experiments to measure the accuracy of surface slant from judgments of the relative lengths of a pair of orthogonal lines embedded in one surface of a full visual scene. Slant judgments were accurate to within 38 for all three cue types, with no evidence of the recession to the frontal plane expected if the pictorial surface was contaminating the estimations.…”
Section: Surfaces As a Mid-level Invariant In Visual Encodingmentioning
confidence: 99%