Advertisement

Measuring Visual Shape using Computer Graphics Psychophysics

  • M. S. Langer
  • H. H. Bülthoff
Part of the Eurographics book series (EUROGRAPH)

Abstract

This paper reviews recent psychophysical methods that have been developed for measuring the perceived shape of objects. We discuss two types of shape ambiguities that exist for many objects — a depth reversal ambiguity and an affine ambiguity. We show that people perceptually resolve these shape ambiguities by making strong prior assumptions the object.

Keywords

Visual System Object Shape Local Shape Depth Gradient Binocular Disparity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. BBC84.
    K. Berbaum, T. Bever, and C.S. Chung. Extending the perception of shape from known to unknown shading. Perception, 13:479–488, 1984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. BKY97.
    P. Belhumeur, D. Kriegman, and A. Yuille. The bas-relief ambiguity. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 1060–1066, San Juan, Puerto Rico, June 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. BM88.
    H. Bülthoff and H. Mallot. Interaction of depth modules: Stereo and shading. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 5:1749–1758, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. BM90.
    H. Bülthoff and H. Mallot. AI and the eye, chapter Integration of stereo, shading, and texture, pages 119–146. Wiley, 1990.Google Scholar
  5. Bre26.
    D. Brewster. On the optical illusion of the conversion of cameos into intaglios and of intaglios into cameos, with an account of other analogous phenomena. Edinburgh Journal of Science, 4:99–108, 1826.Google Scholar
  6. BV99.
    V. Blanz and T. Vetter. Morphable model for the synthesis of 3d faces. In SIGGRAPH Conference Proceedings, pages 187–194, 1999.Google Scholar
  7. CK97.
    C. G. Christou and J. J. Koenderink. Light source dependence in shape from shading. Vision Research, 37(11):1441–1449, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. EKK93.
    R. Erens, A. Kappers, and J. J. Koenderink. Perception of local shape from shading. Perception and Psychophysics, 54(2):145–156, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gre70.
    R. Gregory. The Intelligent Eye. MacGraw-Hill, New York, 1970.Google Scholar
  10. HB93.
    H. Hill and V. Bruce. Independent effects of lighting, orientation, and stereopsis on the hollow-face illusion. Perception, 22:887–897, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. KKT+96.
    J. J. Koenderink, A. M. L. Kappers, J. T. Todd, J. F. Norman, and F. Philips. Surface range and attitude probing in stereoscopically presented dynamic scenes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22:869–878, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. KMK97.
    D. Kersten, P. Mamassian, and D. C. Knill. Moving cast shadows induce apparent motion in depth. Perception, 26(2):171–192, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. KvDCL96.
    J. J. Koenderink, A. J. van Doom, C. Christou, and J. S. Lappin. Perturbation study of shading in pictures. Perception, 25(9): 1009–1026, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. KvDK92.
    J. Koenderink, A. van Doom, and A. Kappers. Surface perception in pictures. Perception and Psychophysics, 52(5):487–496, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. KvDK96.
    J. J. Koenderink, A. J. van Doom, and A. M. L. Kappers. Pictorial surface attitude and local depth comparisons. Perception and Psychophysics, 1996.Google Scholar
  16. LBss.
    M. S. Langer and H. H. Bülthoff. Depth discrimination from shading under diffuse lighting. Perception, 2000 (in press).Google Scholar
  17. Luc16.
    M. Luckiesh. Light and shade and their applications. Van Nostrand, 1st edition edition, 1916.Google Scholar
  18. LZ94.
    M. Langer and S. Zucker. Shape-from-shading on a cloudy day. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 11(2):467–478, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. MKK96.
    P. Mamassian, D. Kersten, and D. Knill. Categorical local-shape perception. Perception, 25:95–107, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. MLM97.
    P. Mamassian, M. S. Landy, and L. T. Maloney. Global shape and surface orientation. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 1997.Google Scholar
  21. MT86.
    E. Mingolla and J. Todd. Perception of solid shape from shading. Biological Cybernetics, 53:137–151, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. NT96.
    J. F. Norman and J. T. Todd. The discriminability of local surface structure. Perception, 25:381–398, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. RBOO.
    J. C. Rodger and R. A. Browse. Choosing rendering parameters for effective communication of 3d shape. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 2000.Google Scholar
  24. Rit86.
    D. Rittenhouse. Explanation of an optical deception. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 2:37–43, 1786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. RT90.
    F. R. Reichel and J. T. Todd. Perceived depth inversion of smoothly curved surfaces due to image orientation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16(3):653–664, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. RTY95.
    F. D. Reichel, J. T. Todd, and E. Yilmaz. Visual discrimination of local surface depth and orientation. Perception and Psychophysics, 57(8): 1233–1240, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. SB87.
    K. Stevens and A. Brookes. Probing depth in monocular images. Biological Cybernetics, 56:355–366, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ste83.
    K. Stevens. Slant-tilt: the visual encoding of surface orientation. Biological Cybernetics, 46:183–195, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. TA87.
    J. Todd and R. Akerstrom. Perception of three-dimensional form from patterns of optical texture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13(2):242–255, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. TM83.
    J. Todd and E. Mingolla. Perception of surface curvature and direction of illumination from patterns of shading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9(4):583–595, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. TN95.
    J. T. Todd and J. F. Norman. The visual discrimination of relative surface orientation. Perception, 24:855–866, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. TR89.
    J. Todd and F. Reichel. Ordinal structure in the visual perception and cognition of smoothly curved surface. Psychological Review, 96(4):643–657, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. War94.
    G. J. Ward. The radiance lighting simulation and rendering system. Computer Graphics, pages 459–472, July 1994.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. S. Langer
    • 1
  • H. H. Bülthoff
    • 1
  1. 1.Max-Planck-Institute for Biological CyberneticsTübingenGermany

Personalised recommendations