What do we know about perception that might make up believe her leg was photoshopped off?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/06/emma-watson-for-burberrys_n_413731.html
What do we know about perception that might make up believe her leg was photoshopped off?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/06/emma-watson-for-burberrys_n_413731.html
With the way her leg is angled, you would expect it to show up at the opening of the Alex's pants. Since it is not there, the leg has to be either flipped up (if it was, ouch!) or hidden directly behind the Alex's left leg (which is possible). But it seems if her leg were to extend out, she would have to be holding it up. There's no way it would be able to reach the floor at an angle.
Here's another photo shop mystery you may have seen recently. I think it is kind of funny. What do you think?
http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2009/11/19/2009-11-19_the_overzealous_photoshoppers_strike_again_demi_moore_missing_a_chunk_of_leg_on_.html?r=gossip&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+nydnrss%2Fgossip+%28Gossip%29
We will find out later on in the course that the brain tries to come up with the most plausable solution when it attempts to intreprert the world. For example what are our expections of where the leg should be. We will cover a section of Gestalt perception later on as well.
That Demi More piece is really interesting. Thanks for the link. Have you ever seen the poggendorph illusion. Could this account for what is going on with Demi's hip? What do you think?
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PoggendorffIllusion.html
PS - I really like how you commented on the original piece and added to it!
No I do not think it is a poggendorff illusion. It is not at an angle where you can draw in the missing piece to make the 2 ends connect. There is definitely a chuck of her hip that's not there. You think this could almost be a hering illusion?
http://www.michaelbach.de/ot/ang_hering/index.html