Week #2 Web Divergence

| 21 Comments

For this web divergence I would like you to find some web material that relates to what we have been reading about in our reader. I would like you to integrate what our reader and text discuss in relation to the site. When you write about the site, 1) Discuss in general what the site is about, 2) discuss why you chose this particular aspect of what we have been covering, 3) discuss how the web site uses the material - how it supports or extends what we have learned, 4) how does the reader present the material (what does it say about the material), 5) How does your text handle the material (what does it say), and 6) After reading the three sources of information, what do you now have to say about the particular topic you chose.

When you develop your comment for your homework please use the numbering system above for organization sake.

Take care,

 

--Dr. M 

 

21 Comments

http://thelongthread.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/silhouettes-framed.jpg
1) The website shows examples of facial silhouettes. They are pictures of young children and have been framed to hang on the wall as decoration. The child’s faces are traced down to the tiniest details including their eyelashes.
2) I chose the aspect of silhouettes because it is an activity I have application experience with. When I was a child, I was sat down in front of a bright light against a screen while my facial silhouette was traced onto construction paper, and then intricately cut out. I remember doing this activity vividly because I thought it was so amazing how exactly my shadow was traced, and then cut out and how this looked just like me. Everybody’s silhouette tracing were distinguishable as a student in my class. It was almost like a picture. When I was reading the reader, I immediately thought of this activity and how it was made possible by an accidental view. Viewing the shadow straight on is the only way that the drawing will come out proportionally, and recognizable.
3) The website gives a good example of how silhouettes can be used as art. This is an extension of what the reader discusses. The shadow would only make sense as a face, and be recognizable as a particular person when viewed from directly in front. From a side view the shadow may look like a blob, and wouldn’t have the distinguishing features to be identified as a child.
4) The reader discusses how when an object is projected onto a screen the outer limits of the image are projected, creating a silhouette. If you move your position when viewing the object, you move the rim and the shape of the projected image changes. The reader gives an example of a 3-5 sphere and how a flat circle is projected when viewed straight on because of the sphere’s boundaries.
5) My textbook didn’t discuss the visual rim. I couldn’t even find anything about an objects silhouette and how the eye perceives it. I’m unsure if this was because it’s a simple concept to understand and may not be described in a college level class, or if my book used different terminology because of its age.
6) The topic I chose was a fairly simple concept. I chose the concept however, because I had firsthand art experience with it. I had never thought about the technicalities of this project though. My preschool art project had to be done in an exact way in order to portray the effect of my face. This project wouldn’t be possible if the eye could detect 3-D imagery in a silhouette.

1)The website has different eye illusions on it; it also contains color blind tests. The pictures that I was most interested in were the pictures that aren’t moving but look like they are.
2)I chose to focus on illusions of the eye because it still fascinates me that our eyes can do these magical things with motion, depth, and making objects look 3D.
3)This website doesn’t talk about why our eyes react to the pictures. I just liked learning about the examples in the book and seeing them in other pictures.
4)The book first talks about these illusions as, in reality, not possible because using our logic we know that a flat picture in a book can’t really be 3D. With the magic square example, our logic knows that it can’t have a bright square in the middle of the lines. The book refers these examples to elaborate fabrication; what our eyes construct is logical.
5)My textbook doesn’t mention the ripple or the magic square but it does talk about other illusions. For example, the angular size-contrast theory that says objects appear smaller when surrounded by other objects. The text mainly focuses on perceiving size, which is influenced by our perception of depth.
6)I always thought that visual illusions were interesting because it’s a flat surface but our eyes turn it into something that’s not just 2D. The website pictures were just fun to look at; I didn’t get any information from them. I was hoping the book would talk specifically about why our eyes make pictures move, like the ones on the website. However, my book only talked about perceiving size. I think how we perceive objects to be tall or far away based on our perception of depth is pretty interesting. It’s not just based on how our retina sees the size of the image but also our perception of depth. The reader just stemmed my interest of illusions based on their examples; the ripple and magic square.

http://brainden.com/eye-illusions.htm
1)The website has different eye illusions on it; it also contains color blind tests. The pictures that I was most interested in were the pictures that aren’t moving but look like they are.
2)I chose to focus on illusions of the eye because it still fascinates me that our eyes can do these magical things with motion, depth, and making objects look 3D.
3)This website doesn’t talk about why our eyes react to the pictures. I just liked learning about the examples in the book and seeing them in other pictures.
4)The book first talks about these illusions as, in reality, not possible because using our logic we know that a flat picture in a book can’t really be 3D. With the magic square example, our logic knows that it can’t have a bright square in the middle of the lines. The book refers these examples to elaborate fabrication; what our eyes construct is logical.
5)My textbook doesn’t mention the ripple or the magic square but it does talk about other illusions. For example, the angular size-contrast theory that says objects appear smaller when surrounded by other objects. The text mainly focuses on perceiving size, which is influenced by our perception of depth.
6)I always thought that visual illusions were interesting because it’s a flat surface but our eyes turn it into something that’s not just 2D. The website pictures were just fun to look at; I didn’t get any information from them. I was hoping the book would talk specifically about why our eyes make pictures move, like the ones on the website. However, my book only talked about perceiving size. I think how we perceive objects to be tall or far away based on our perception of depth is pretty interesting. It’s not just based on how our retina sees the size of the image but also our perception of depth. The reader just stemmed my interest of illusions based on their examples; the ripple and magic square.

1) I found a very simple site that defines linear perspective and gives an interactive example. http://psych.hanover.edu/krantz/art/linear.html
2) I chose to look more in depth at linear perspective because I am amazed at how artists can make images show depth and distance. I took an art history class and learned about perspective a bit but never from the visual standpoint. I am not a good artist and I applaud those who are.
3) The web site I found defines linear perspective and shows two paintings and gives some comentary about them explaining how the buildings in one are made to look tall and in the distance just by making the lines not parallel. There is also an interactive image that shows the differance between perspective and no perspective.
4) The reader talks shortly about linear perspective on page 34-36 showing a painting that lacks perspective in the floor tiles. They lack a vanishing point. The artist then tried to hide the floor tiles with a pillar and then made the man in the image looking to the pillar instead of Jesus. Perspective is needed to interpret images. Without perspective images would look flat and one dimensional.
5) My text has a some information on linear perspective but again not a lot. The text goes into talking about how Leonardo da Vinci explained perspective as looking through a window to see how things should be drawn on the other side. The technique was then called Alberti's Window. It's where anyone can draw in perspective if they trace an image through a piece of glass. The book shows a picture of a man painting using Alberti's Window.
6) I have to say that I still can't draw in perspective unless I'm tracing. Perspective is something that everyone sees and not everyone can reproduce. I'm glad I looked more in depth on this certain topic. I found some older images that lacked perspective and were still published instead of being fixed. Not only does art have perspective but everyone perceives images a bit differently.

http://www.visualillusion.net/

1) Like a lot of people I am really interested in Optical Illusions. I wanted to find the name of the books I use to have in Elementary School where there was a picture and when you stare at it long enough you can see face or other things like that in the picture, but I couldn't find the name of those. So, I started looking up different optical Illusions and I ran across this website. This website is about Visual Illusions: Their Causes, Characteristics and Applications it is an outline/summary of a book written by Matthew Luckiesh. Luckiesh was involved in "The Great War" and his job was to figure out how to conceal their ships and things such as that from their enemies. He talks about Optical Illusions, how they are made and how they work. There are pictures and examples of many different types of Optical Illusions. He also goes into how the eye works.

2) I choose this particular aspect of what we are studying, because I find it extremely interesting. Even when I was a kid I use to love any kind of books that involved optical illusions (I wish I could remember the names), and ever since then I can't seem to learn enough about optical illusions.

3) This website and the book and the read all go along together fairly well. There is one chapter that is devoted to figuring out the structures and functions of the eye, just like in my textbook, it describes the eye and has a picture and everything to help explain the information. Also, it highlights the different types of optical illusions. For example, it has a chapter about architectural optical illusions, similar to "The Devil's Triangle". It also mentions lines, and how lines can trick our eyes by either being straight up and down or tilted perpendicular and how they effect what we see.

4) The reader presents the material that this website presents in a similar way. The reader shows pictures of the optical illusion and then explains what we see and why we see that, the website does this too, it just explains in a little more detail. The reader talks about natural and linear perspective and this book hits on those topic also. The reader focuses on shapes (as far as I have read) and the website goes one step further and talks about he lighting and shapes and how they go together. (I'm sure the book will hit more of this information in the future)

5)The text discusses the eye and the logistics of it, how it functions, and how it is structured. This website also hits on these important points chapter two of the website show the picture of the eye similar to the books. Also, this website discusses the way our eyes interpret light and the ways our eyes work with the light.

6) After reading the text, the reader, and the website, I still am very interested in optical illusions, and how they eye works. I like the way the three things teach the same information different and present the material in different ways to help me fully understand it. I know have a better knowledge of optical illusions because of these three sources used together.

1) This website talks about the Gestalt Principles of Object Perception; Figure and Ground, Similarity, Proximity or Contiguity, Continuity, Closure, Area, and Symmetry.
http://graphicdesign.spokanefalls.edu/tutorials/process/gestaltprinciples/gestaltprinc.htm

2) I find it facinating how dots and shapes can form perceptual images and can be seen differently from person to person. I enjoyed learning about this in the History and Systems Course.

3) The website explains what happens to our eyes when we see the examples they provide. It supports what we have learned; that logic dictates that the figure cannot at once contain and not contain a bright a bright square in the "magic square" on pg. 3 of our visual intelligence book.

4) The reader simply states the principles, how the eye perceives the images, and gives examples of each principle.

5) The textbook I have discusses the Gestalt Principles in great detail, which takes up 13 pages. It shows a variety of examples for each principle. However, when skimming through the pictures, I did not find them very useful in understanding what I am suppose to get from the picture that relates to the principle. The website I have gives a much better demonstration.

6) After reading the 3 sources of information, I almost wish there were more principles. I recently picked up a hobby of looking at Pareidolia pictures. You may not be familiar with the term, but many know this as "the devil coming out of the smoke from the twin towers plane crash. Look at these pictures and you will see what I am talking about. Pages 27-36
http://courses.washington.edu/psy333/lecture_pdfs/chapter5_Objects.pdf

http://www.optillusions.com/

1)This site basically showed that there were many different kinds of optical illusions. The site had some interesting illusions that the average person would miss if they weren't paying close attention to what they were trying to portray. The illusions ranged from colors,weird lines,image flips, strange circles, hidden pictures,appearing and disappearing objects and many other categories as well.

2)The main reason why I chose this topic of optical illusions was because I consider myself to have a pretty good sense of vision and I remember things I see quite well. In looking at this topic, I continue to find myself duped or not catching the illusions that are being shown. So I am interested as to why my eye doesn't catch whats going on and how can I get better at catching these different things. I'm also interested in multiple techniques I can use to pick up on these tricks.

3)the website basically laid out the illusions for you to see and decipher. It really didn't have to much material as to why these illusions exist, but I went to look throughout the textbook and the reader to find out what actually happens in these cases. It used multiple illusions in different categories. The website supports the fact that we construct what see see even if we miss the hidden object that is essential to catching. The visual intelligence book talks about how vision not only fabricates, but it does it, at times,unconstrained by reality. It also said that it is natural to construct according to your own principles.

4)The reader also lays out some illusions and describes them as well as the website did. The reader went into more specific details as to why we see what we see. One of the first things that was brought to my attention was the way things visually appear to you which uses the term phenomenal sense. It used the example of the ripples displaying the Phenomenal Sense also the edges and brightness of the magic square. The Relational sense is what the person interacts with when they are viewing a object. In looking at the magic square, the square jumped out at me because I was interacting with the different lines as they were placed.

5)The textbook went into depth a lot more than the website and the reader as far as terms. Its talks about apparent motion which hits on the neurons A and B that separate things by fixed distances. The books defines this as the illusory impression of smooth motion resulting from the rapid alteration of objects that appear in different locations. One thing I thought was quite intriguing was when the text talked about correspondence problem for motion. The problem that are vision faces in our motion detection system is how to detect motion in the different frames and how they correspond with each other. Understanding the the construct of the eye is essential to finding out why we are susceptible to illusions. Alot of times, we don't catch certain objects due to the different forms of lighting. This is explained in the text as the optical array. We also use optic flow to in our visual system to determine where were going. A specific form of that is focus of expansion.

6)After reading the three sources of information about Illusion, I can say that I didn't know how much information and research to describe what causes illusions. Also I was flabbergasted to see how many avenues you can go down to get to the root of illusion. Its almost like a domino effect because you start with the eye in self then you can go to the different terms and theories that talk about how we construct picture and so on. After researching this, I can see why people in America and other countries spend so much money on going to see magicians and illusionist. This is because we tend to trust what we see until our construct has been dis proven.

http://www.eyes-and-vision.com/how-animals-see-the-world.html

1) The part of this site I looked at is called "How Animals See the World." The page shows pictures of the way different animals see followed by a brief explanation. The link for this page came from the section of the site called "Just for Fun" which I think is worth looking at also because it has some animated optical illusions which also tie into what we have been discussing.

2) I found this topic very interesting when coming across it in the reader. When thinking about animals, I've always just assumed that they see the same way I do but I discovered that this is not true for most.

3) The web site gives descriptions of why the animals listed see differently. This is done by explaining how the eye is constructed and what that means about how the animals' vision works.

4) The reader briefly describes how some different animals see. It touches on the aspects of color, light, motion, and shape. The reader also describes how certain animals can be tricked by different shapes to believe the shape is "mom", prey, or a predator.

5) The only time my text refers to animal vision is in saying that kittens have an innate vision system like human babies. Without any visual experience, they have a visual coding system to go by.

6) Animal vision is still very interesting to me and I would like to learn more about the purpose of animals' differences in sight. I also found the cow eye dissection interesting when we were shown that a cow has a tapetum at the back of the eye that reflects light. Cats also have this and that is why their eyes look as if they glow in the dark. It's so interesting to realize that many creatures have different vision and different eye construction. I've never really considered animal vision in this way before and I love learning more about it!

1) The site I chose for this web divergence activity is: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/molyneux-problem/ This site delves into Molyneux's problem, a philosophical problem which asks whether a formerly blind person would be able to recognize shapes by sight alone. As presented in our reader, this problem was resolved, for some, with the case of the surgeon William Cheselden who was able to surgically restore sight to a 14 year old boy.

2) I chose this topic because I found it fascinating on multiple levels. The philosophical problem itself is fascinating in that it deals with the nature of what vision is. Additionally, the storytelling in the beginning chapters of our reader captures my attention as the text presents a problem in a real world, and compels me to understand the rest of the story - I wanted to know all the details of how a blind boy with new visual capabilities could offer insight to something we take for granted our whole lives! And this boy could now describe his experiences in a way no one else had ever been able. And this makes me want to delve more deeply into my own understanding of what perception is.

3) The web site offered a history of the philosophical problem. It delved into the relationship of William Molynuex to John Locke and how Locke was able to propel this question into the philosophical mindset making it on of "the most fruitful thought experiments ever proposed in the history of philosophy.
While our reader treats the philosophical problem as a if it had been resolved through the work of the surgeon William Cheselden. And also confirms that association is required for an individaul to perceptually confirm a match-up between touch and sight. However; the web site differs in that it states that there are those who consider the problem less than completely resolved. The site also discusses more rigorously controlled experiments than the one presented in our reader.

4) Other than what is stated above (in point 3), one of the most interesting parts of this story in our reader is how the boy describes sight essentially feeling to his eyes like touch. Which brings to bear point 5...

5) The most pertinent part of the Goldstein text for this topic has to do with an illustrative passage which talks about the enzyme cascade that occurs when a single pigment molecule is activated by a quantum of light. This description is of a domino effect - light being the trigger which "touches" and activates this beautiful chain reaction which is interpreted by our brains as sight.

6) And so after reading these three sources I probably have more questions than answers. I am simply amazed at the concept of how and what perception means both philosophically and scientifically. What more can I say except that learning is a grand adventure?!


1) This site describes what the Necker cube is and how is started. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necker_Cube
2)I know that we have not technically covered this yet but we will tomorrow and I found it really interesting as I was reading the material for class. In art this is the way you begin to learn how to draw 3-D objects but it has always been fascinating to me how something that is completely flat can be drawn in a way that it appears to stand on the page by itself.
3) The website talks about it being an ambigous object but it builds on this by explaining how there are 2 different views of this cube. The human brain prefers to view the cube from above so that is how we tend to see it. It also goes into some detail on the idea of the impossible object.
4)The reader says that about 50 percent of people will see it with vertex A behind (Above) and 50 percent see vertex B behind (below). Instead of the brain prefering one or the other.
5)I could not find what the text had to say about this particular phenomenon.
6)I find this to be really interesting. Reading the reader I thought it was hard to see the difference between A and B but I did find a link that demonstrates it a little better.
http://dogfeathers.com/java/necker.html

http://www.strabismus.org/critical_period_Hubel.html
1: The site I looked up is on early vision development and problems that can occur during what is considered to be the critical developmental stage in the first six months. The main focus was on ambliopia and strabismus. Both are a form of "lazy eye" with one having to do with eye muscle strength being unequal, and the other with the way the brain interprets the visual signals as weaker in one eye.

2: I chose this topic because I wanted to know more about the early development of vision, babies go from such poor vision at birth to complex visual capabilities in a relatively short amount of time, it really is amazing when you think about it.

3: The website had a lot more information on how vision develops in babies, and also in animals. Research that was done on animals with visual sensory deprivation is looked at to show different critical periods in visual development that if disrupted could have lasting negative effects. With so much development happening so rapidly there are many systems that must work together. When these processes are disrupted during early development there are far worse effects than if the disruption were to happen even a few months later. Amblyopia happens when the brain "prefers" one eye to the other, like if one eye is near sited and the other is not. Strabismus is more noticeable in that the eye muscles in one eye may be weaker and cause one eye to drift (lazy eye).

4: The information in the reader really doesn't go into detail (or at least not in chapter one) on early vision disruptions and the after effects. The reader briefly describes the vast amount of development that occurs in the first year of life in babies, and also mentions that animals experience a similar burst of visual development early on. I guess I took some liberty here in looking a bit farther into the subject than the reader does. I guess it was my own curiosity to wonder what happens if the intricate system of early vision development gets mussed up a bit.

5: My text is Goldsteins' S&P 4th edition. chapters one and two both have more in depth sections at the end of them discussing material to do with the web site. Chapter one has a very good description of the ins and outs of visual development in babies up to one year. this goes into much greater detail than does the reader. Chapter two has research done on animal vision and critical periods. the same information is cited with experiments done on cats and monkeys. some experiments used methods to deprive the animals of correct function by lacerating muscles to create a lazy eye, or by stimulating or damaging brain tissues to alter the visual stimulations strength. this chapter then looks at human subjects and focuses on early intervention for children with lazy eye or other visual development challenges.

6: what do I have to say? Wow. I actually have a friend who suffered from lazy eye as a child and went through many surgeries to correct her vision. I called her up and had to know more after reading about the subject. she and her daughter both have weak eye muscles and needed interventions early on. Her daughter and her still need to wear corrective lenses because of some nearsightedness in the weaker eye, but because she knew what symptoms to look for her daughter should be able to avoid the eye surgeries she had to go through. It's really kinda neat I think!

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081120183733.htm

1) I found a news article that reports scientists to have solved a 200-year old debate involving visual illusions. More specifically, the illusion involves a stationary image that appears to be rotating. The debate in question is over whether the brain or the eye is behind the perception of the illusory motion. Using measurements of microsaccades(a small, unconscious eye movement that occurs when we fixate our eyes), scientists at have linked origins of the illusion not solely in the brain, but the eye movement itself.

2) I chose this article because it relates directly visual illusions, which I find fairly interesting and corresponds well with the topics we've been reading about. Also, the fact that new light has been shed upon an enigma that has existed for centuries may open the door for new studies, which is exciting.

3) The web site addresses the perception of visual motion directly and links the origins of the apparent motions we see to cognitive processes as well as the actual movement of the eye, which was unclear until recently. The study may also contribute to the development of prosthetics for patients with brain damage or lesions.

4) Visual intelligence touches on the topic of illusions very early in chapter one by introducing the "ripple." This is 2-D image that appears to undulate right before your eyes on the page. It is, in fact, and illusion constructed by the brain's visual system. The illusion is furthered by the "magic square", where our brain constructs a seemingly brighter square out of a scattered border of lines, and the "Devil's triangele", and intangible blueprint of a triangle that can never be fabricated in real life. The reason we see these shapes and illusions is due to elaborate fabrication.

5) The text provides very technical dissection of visual motion, starting with apparent motions (position changes over time appear as a solid motion) that give us movies and television. The text highlights the likely importance of the middle temporal lobe in the perception of motion. Although the text covers saccades (fast movements of the eye that shift points of fixation) it does not directly address the visual and cognitive processes involved with the illusions discussed in the article and the reader.

6) After reading the different sources of literature, it can be easy to say that much is still unknown about how we perceive visual illusions. Although the illusions were previously thought to result from processes solely in the brain, new research reveals this hypothesis to be untrue, and adds that these illusions are also due to physical movements of the eye as well as activity in the brain.

http://marsprogram.jpl.nasa.gov/MPF/index1.html
1.) This website shows different images obtained by the Imager for Mars Pathfinder in 1997 as well as other information on the mission, including the findings of the pathfinder, information on the people who were involved in the mission, a frequently asked questions link, and a link (http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/MPF/imp/anatomy/records.html) where a more information is given on how the IMP records and communicates the different images of Mars.

2.) The IMP was mentioned in the reader at the end of chapter 2 and it sparked my interest because it shows the amazing things that technology can do and I was interested because, as it mentioned in the reader, it is more complicated to obtain these images than just sending something to Mars to take pictures.

3.) The website elaborates on what was discussed in the reader on how these images are created. First, photons of light from Mars are filtered and each cell is assigned a number proportional to how light it is. These numbers are then sent by radio waves down to Earth and the images that would have been 'seen' by the IMP are recreated. Scientists use numbers because they need something that can be analyzed using quantitative figures.

4.) The reader focuses on how, although the IMP can create these images for us to look at, it doesn't actually see them because it lacks visual intelligence. No amount of money or new technology used can allow a machine to view things that we can.

5.)In my textbook nothing was mentioned about the Mars Pathfinder specifically, but in one section the author discussed how it is difficult for computers to perceive objects, including that sometimes objects can be hidden, aren't separated from one another, and the changes in lightness and darkness can be from unknown reasons. The textbook also mentions that we are much more capable of perceiving images because we can interpret the images using what we already know from past experience.

6.)After reviewing these three sources I think that it is really interesting, and I am curious about what technological advances have been made since the launch of the Mars Pathfinder in 1997. Also, it makes me appreciate the extremely intelligent people who work with, understand and engineer this technology.

1) The website I found was a optical illusion site that showed many different ways you can "trick" your brain. It also talks about how complex the human eye is and how we see different objects different amond people.

2)I think it is interesting to see how different people really are, even down to simple things like eye sight and optical illusions. They always say you got to see it to believe it, however with optical illusions sometimes seeing a certain thing is completly different than what the other person right next to you is seeing. Its just neat to see the different ways our eyes trick what we are thinking and we see different things. Its all very complex, but its also very interesting.

3)The book talks about how different people have troubles forming edges around certain shapes. For example they would outline a square with different shapes and some people would be able to see the square in the middle right away while others would have trouble pointing out what the object really was. The book also talks about how different brightness and other shades or shapes will affect how a person sees a different shape. (or how they dont see the shape either)The website isnt used as much of a learning website as much as it is used as an entertaining website. But all of the optical illusions that they use play a role in how certain people will see things while others wont. They are using different shades of colors and different shapes to help people see or not see what they want to. Its just an entertaining website that shows us how different we all can look at the same thing.

4) The textbook goes into great depth about the differences between cones and rods and how we all react to certain kinds of light. It helps us show why some people have trouble picking up different shapes because of shades of colors while other people cant even see a different optical illusion. It talks about how you can construct shapes with brightness without constructing boarders.

5)The textbook goes into depth about how people see the different shades and boarders of certain objects. It also talks about straight edges versus "cusp" edges. A cusp edge is a round edge that makes it harder for people to fully define the shape that isnt in a solid color. While if you have a straight dark edge it would be easier to tell what shape is missing from the optical illusion.

6) I have never really actually thought about optical illusions as much as I have now. I have never actually sat down and thought wow all they are doing is tricking my eye. Its an interesting subject and is something that I will look into. It also makes me think about how hard it would have been for people to finally understand why optical illusions are just illusions and understand that the eye is just tricking itself. I would have never thought that dark vs light or straight vs curved boarders would have made a difference on how we see certain objects.

1) The web site that I found is about visual illusions. It talks about the first person to write a book about visual illusions, Matthew Luckiesh. The web site also talks about the characteristics of Visual Illusions and what causes Visual Illusions.
http://www.visualillusion.net/
2) I chose to find a web site about Visual Illusions because they fascinate me. I wanted to know more about Visual Illusions because I'm so curious to know how visual illusions are processed through out perception and through our brain. Its so interesting to me how our eyes can adjust to that however; I also find it interesting how not everyone experiences visual illusions and how there are some people who have a hard time processing the visual illusions.
3) The web site, itself, goes into a little more detail than we have discussed in class. The web site discusses more history on how Visual Illusions came about and also goes into more detail about the characteristics of visual illusions and how our eyes adjust to it. A lot of the information provided by the web site is similar to what we've read in the reader as well as what we've been discussing in class however; the information provided by the web site goes in more depth.
4) The reader goes into detail about how our perception reflects the light and how that affects how we see Visual Illusions. Also, the reader talks about the ripple, devils triangle, necker's cube etc. and tries to explain how our perception see's different 2-dimentional or 3-dimentional shapes.
5) In Goldstein's sixth edition Sensation & Perception book he talks about how verdical perception plays an intricae role in how we see Visual Illusions. Goldstein defines an illusion as a nonverdical perception such as mistaking a small box for a truck. Goldstein talks about the psychological perceptive of illusions and suggests that the goal in constructing these illusions is to do experiements that will uncover the mechanism responsible for the illution.
6) Reading these three sources has really made me contemplate this topic more thoroughly, they all present simlar but different information and although they clearly state how Visual Illusions play an effect on our perception it still intrigues me to know more about it. And although these three sources have provided immense information about Visual Illusions I will most likely always find myself continue to wondering about our perception and visual illusions, its a very fascinating topic.

http://www.scientificpsychic.com/graphics/
1) This website has several visual illusions and explains how optical illusions can be constructed by our perception. It also has some games to train your brain and be able to decipher optical illusions more easily. The ones that interested me the most are the ones related to size constancy and depth perception.
2) I’m really intrigued by the fact that our own senses can sometimes makes us perceive things that are unreal and how easily we can be tricked by our perceptions.
3) The website explains that the components of an object can distort the perceptions of the complete object. It also summarizes five circumstances where an optical illusion can occur. I focused on two of them which are the influence of background patterns on the overall design and inability to interpret the spatial structure of an object from the context provided by the picture. I picked these because we can be exposed to them in our everyday life.
4) The reader explains that our vision allow us to see these illusions because it fabricates what our senses perceive unconstrained by reality. This fabrication is also ruled by principles that construct everything we see, and although we can make sense of some of these deceptive constructions we ignore to do it.
5) The textbook looks are various examples that are also found in the website. It describes several theories that attempt to explain why illusions occur. It states that illusions in general, are usually perceived when we receive inaccurate information from our environment. Illusions such as the Müller-Lyer and the Ponzo illusions can be attributed to a bad adjustment of our size-distance scaling mechanism to the depth information perceived. Another explanation is that illusions occur when the two cues we use to perceive length conflict which are the actual length of the vertical lines and the overall length of the figure.
6) I thought I’d find an answer to how illusions are constructed by our visual system but I found that are several theories that try to answer these errors. Nevertheless, we know that the way we infer visual properties and the rules that guide these constructions are genetically determined. So have our perceptions changed generation after generation due to the exposure to more and newer (and unreal like science fiction) visual stimuli? I also wonder if there is there a way to improve our senses to be able to perceive things more accurately.

http://www.eyecanlearn.com/

1) The site that I found was an interactive site. It has you do different activities to show how well your eye reacts in different settings. For example, there may be an activity where you are slowly given pieces of a puzzle and you have to see how quickly you can recognize what the picture is before all of the pieces are put together. This specific example examines how well you are at visual closure. There are many different things that your eyes can be "tested" on, though.

2) To me this website was very interesting because it covered multiple areas where you could have strengths or weakness when dealing with your eye sight. It makes your eyes focus different ways for different activities. It was also a fun sight to learn from because it was interactive.

3) The website is related to what we have been learning in the reader because it shows that things may not always be as they seem, and that there are rules that are visual system follow for certain situations. It doesn't have too much written information on the site, but it does provide a lot of example of ways to test your eyes.

4) The reader discusses more about 2D and 3D objects and how they may seem one way even though, they are actually the other. Also, the reader goes more in depth about the specific rules that you use when using your visual system.

5) The text goes more into specifics about the eye, what makes up the eye, and how the visually system works, step by step. the text overall gives way more specific information about the eye and how we perceive things, compared to the website that gives short discriptions, but lots of interactive activities.

6) I have never really thought about the different ways our eyes see in different situations. After reading all three sources, it has shown me that our eyes have guidelines that they follow, and although our eyes may be very good at seeing in some situations they may not be as strong in other areas/situations. It also makes me more curious about my own eyes and their capabilities.

http://library.thinkquest.org/27066/depth/nlambiguous.html
#1. The website talks about Depth Ambiguity and how artists as well other creators use depth in their pieces for their customers/fans to interpret how they feel fits the piece. It also talks about how brain percieves things the eye sees as 3D.
#2. I chose this website because depth was something talked about in both Chapter 1 and 2 of the readers as well as in the Sensation and Perception books. Depth is seen in everything we look at. So it is interesting to understand what our eyes are really seeing and what the brain interprets that as.
#3. There wasn't a whole lot of writing on the webpage, but what was written coincided with what we have talked about already with depth perception dealing with shapes and artwork in the reader.
#4. In the reader there was a lot of different images in both chapter one and chapter two that had to so with depth.
#5. In the Sensation and Perception book there wasn't anything on the topic of depth perception but it did talk a lot about illusions. Which I would relate illusions to the idea of depth ambiguity. The book states that when spatial cues are not as obvious we question those objects more because they cause us to question what we are seeing. Therefore these images may become distored and that is what causes illusions. The book also talks about how there is a lot of discussion related to illusions and how or what we precieve them as. to support this they say that many objects contain the potential for anbiguity.
#6. After reading the reader, website, and Sensation & Perception book I have came to the conclusion that illusions and depth ambiguity are a matter of interpretation of what you see. Some people interpret the objects/pictures differently than others therefore it can possible create controversy.

http://www.exploratorium.edu/skateboarding/skatedesign.html
1) I chose to do this divergence on curves, particularly concave curves. Where do we find these curves in real life? One answer is skateboarding.
2) It's nice to try and apply things we learn in class to things i am interested in, it's easier to learn that way.
3) Skate science really illustrated how the "concave" of the board helps riders do a multiple variety of flip tricks. Many modern boards curve upwards, into a concave shape. At the tail, nose, and edges of a board we can clearly see this. It is interesting to note that skateboards tails/noses were never concave until the mid 80's. My deck, a Canadian Moose, has only a slight concave in the nose and tail. I never knew about concave shapes when I bought it, maybe it had a larger curve then. However, after a hearty two summers of thrashing, it's hard to tell. These all help with balance and stability. The website helps me put a definition to what a concave shape is. By remembering this, I can easily remember the other shapes too; convex, and the saddle and how the eye interprets them.
4)The reader points out how to interpret these three types of curves/surfaces. It references a lot of optical illusions and rules to interpret them. It does not really say what these curves practical uses are, but it is nice to associate these concepts with things in real life.
5)The text merely gives definitions of these shapes, all things which are given in the reader.
6)The eye only needs to interpret three types of surfaces; concave, convex, and saddle. Knowing this, it is nice to find an extremely practical way of identifying a real life concave curve and knowing how it relates to activities i do.

http://www.99main.com/~charlief/Blindness.htm
1.)This website that I chose talks about all of the different parts of the eye and their functions.
2.) Ever since I watched the cow eye dissection I have been intrigued with every aspect of the eye and how its parts function. By learning about the eye through websites and the text book I feel that I am able to learn in different ways and I am able to understand everything better.
3.)The website relates to what we have been learning in the reader because the reader talks about vision and how are eye constructs objects and may play tricks on us and the books shows this by illustrating illusions. Although the website doesn't show any illusions, it shows the different parts of the eye and explains why the eye may play tricks on us or how we construct different objects by breaking the parts of the eye down, defining them, and stating their purpose.
4.) The book talks about David Marr, the writer of the book Vision, and how he thought of vision as an active process that produces useful descriptions. His books describes how vision perceives and constructs shapes, textures, motions, and objects. Although the reader doesn't go into great detail about the parts of the eye, the textbook that I bought does a great job of this.
5) The textbook does a great job explaining the parts of the eye and provides many of the vocabulary words that the website states. Although they book doesn't explain near as many as the website, here are some parts of the eye it does explain: The cornea, which is the transparent covering of the front eye which accounts for about 80 percent of the eye's focusing power. The Fovea is a small area in the human retina that contains only cone receptors, and is located on the line of sight, so that when a person looks at an object, its image falls on the fovea. And another vocabulary word that the website and textbook explain is the optic nerve, which is a bundle of nerve fibers that carry impulses from the retina to the lateral geniculate nucleus and other structures. These are just a few of the vocubulary terms that the website and textbook both explain.
6.) After reading about the parts of the eye in my textbook, the reader, and now this website I am very confident in knowing how the eye works and the parts that it contains. I think the eye is very interesting and I want to learn as much as I can about it.

1) http://animals.howstuffworks.com/mammals/bat2.htm This website explains in detail the echolocation of bats and how they are able to distinguish directionality, speed, and size of various objects. Most all bats have very good vision and use echolocation to supplement their vision. Bats that favor insects naturally have the best echolocation as they are less interested in color (e.g. compared to fruit bats) and more interested in subtleties of motion, viz. those mentioned above. So a sound wave is emitted by the bat, and when it hits an object it is reflected back at the bat. Direction is determined by which ear receives the reflected sound first (similarly they have sensors on top of and below their ears indicating vertical directionality); size is determined by intensity of the reflected sound wave, speed and movement by pitch (thanks to the Doppler effect). One problem seems to be that a bat couldn’t know whether it was a large bug that was far away, or a small bug that was close up. Both would seem to provide the same type of reflected wave, but apparently they must have a solution to this.

2) While reading about vision I started thinking about Dan Riskin’s discussions with us about bat’s having normal vision just like humans. This was the initial reason for me looking into bat vision. It seems that most people would accept that echolocation is a type of ‘constructed’ sensory interpretation more easily than they do their own vision, when in actuality echolocation seems to provide more information and involve less interpretation. Both however are still taking ambiguous sensory stimuli and constructing an idea of how the world must be given the datum. Even bats can make mistakes. Dan told us that Wind Turbines are becoming a huge, global problem for bat’s as they are inexplicably drawn towards them and are then killed because something about the turbines makes the bats incapable of avoiding the blades. Something about the perceptual experience of a wind turbine causes the bat’s to form a mistaken construction of what they are, and it doesn’t end well for the bat. Naturally bat biologists have produced numerous theories to explain what about the perceptual experience of a wind turbine has made them the Achilles heel of bats.
3) There is a great line on this website that I’ll quote here which directly relates to the main argument of VI.
“A bat processes all of this information unconsciously, the same way we process the visual and aural information we gather with our eyes and ears. A bat forms an echolocation image in its head that is something like the image you form in your head based on visual information.”
Echolocation for most people is so radically different than how they are used to conceptualizing sensory perceptions that they find it almost completely unbelievable. How could you possibly scream and have such sensitive ears as to determine size, speed, and direction of everything in front of you? The answer is not magical, it’s incredibly complex and sophisticated. Similarly there is no magic in our visual experiences either. Our visual experiences are constructed in a similarly complex and sophisticated way.
4) Thus far in VI we’ve read about many of the rules which go into explaining how our mind constructs 3d images based on 2d images at the back of our retina at the fovea. If you watch a person read a book, navigate an obstacle course, or paddle a canoe it would appear as though everything is happening directly and instantly without any real work involved, other than the physical work required to move your body. Similarly with watching a bat fly they move so quickly and fluidly while catching incredibly miniscule insects that it seems to be automatic. “But it feels that way because we’re fast and expert at construction” (p48). So it also seems to the bat I’d imagine. The construction is so good, in fact, that just like with humans it often takes very careful manipulation in a lab, or some bizarre illusion or happenstance, to detect the mistakes in these constructions; much like the wind turbines. But they are in fact there, and they do follow predictable rules, even if those rules are often difficult to pin down.
5) The text follows along in much the same way by describing things like “The Perceptual Process” whereby we don’t directly perceive sensory information from our environment but instead construct perceptions in our mind. Knowing what we know about light waves becoming electrical impulses in the brain, which cause chemical’s to be released, etc. etc., it simply must be admitted that perception is a constructed phenomena.
6) I still think this is an incredibly interesting topic. I’m left with many questions still about how specifically bats are able to make constructions based on the sound waves, neurons are such amazing cells that their activity can produce a wide variety of effects. One question is what do we make of the similarity between us and bats? If we say bat’s are utterly unlike us and are simple automatons then we seem to be at a loss for explaining how exactly our perceptions are different given that both are the result of strict, albeit, amazingly sophisticated rules.

Leave a comment

Recent Entries

Reading Activity Week #1 (ASAP)
Topical Blog Week #1 (ASAP)
Reading Activity Week #2 (Due Monday)