As we have done already - after reading chapter 4 in Visual Intelligence, go through your text and find out how the text discusses the material in the reader and any additional detail it might offer. You will need to turn in a mind map in class on Tuesday so it might be a good idea to make a mind map before you start the next part of this project.
Try to adhere to the format below - keep the numbering for organization.
1) Discuss what you read in the reader. Think about what you learned from the reader. What were the main points the author was trying to make? What were some examples he used? What was the most interesting part of the chapter - etc.? Don't simply answer these questions; these are just some things to ask yourself before you start writing. I am pretty open to what you write about.
2) Discuss what you read in your text. How did the author of your text book go about addressing the related material? What did you find out about the topic that wasn't covered in the reader? What did you find interesting that was presented in the text? How difficult was it to find the related material in the text? Again don't specifically answer these questions, just use them as a way to think about the material. Feel free to experiment with your own style.
3) After you have had a chance to think about the material - what parts do you think you will remember and what parts do you think might fade from memory sooner.
4) Make a list of the terms and terminology you used in this post.
1) The reader begins with talking about a visual disorder called Dorsal Simultanagnosia. Dorsal Simultanagnosia occurs usually after a stroke, or when there is damage to the parietal and occipital cortex. Dorsal Simultanagnosia (DS) is described as where a person can’t perceive more than one object at a time. The reader describes this well by describing it as a restriction of attention. This leads the book to mention that we are all master part makers. We can look at parts and make them into a whole. Which then leads to the question do we see things in 2D or 3D? The book also mentions “your parts” and comes up with basic rules of our parts for example; it states that your interpretation of parts shouldn’t change if the object changes a bit. Basically saying that if the parts of an image change just a bit you should still be able to recognize and construct the image. The book also talks about how we construct parts from the retinal images of your eye. The reader focuses a lot on concave and convex creases. It shows stairs that can change when you stare at the picture long enough because of concave creases looked at long. The rule of concave creases states that you divide shapes into parts along concave creases, and an example of this would be the staircases shown on page 84. The reader also describes the minima rule which states that you divide shapes into parts at negative minima, along lines of curvature of the principal curvatures. Curvatures can be negative, positive, or zero. This minima rule goes along with silhouettes stating that you divide silhouettes into parts at concave sups and negative minima of curvatures. The reader goes on to give many examples of silhouettes in things such as vases. It gives an example of this in a picture that was made in the 1700’s called “Weeping Willow”.
2) The text starts off talking about how edges are important. Achromatic lightness, brightness, contour, and edges all help us decipher what we see around us, which relates to lateral inhibition described as visual systems equipped to highlight edges. Lateral inhibition explains mach bands. Mach bands is how we perceive bright and dark bands within a single stripe even when light does not vary, mach bands are often described as perceptual phenomenon. The book talks a lot about visual acuity, ability to see fine details, and accommodation, which focuses on near point, far point, and dark focus. The book also describes a lot about movement. Version movements, where the eyes move in the same direction, vergence movements where the eyes move toward or away from each other and the movements are often slow. The text focuses a lot on the eye and how we perceive things, and the movement, lightness, and brightness that help us decipher the world around us.
3) After reading this material I will definitely remember Dorsal Simultanagnosia. I found that extremely interesting especially to see what a person with Dorsal Simultanagnosia sees. I will also remember version movement, vergence movement, and pursuit movement from the book. Mach bands and the mach effect will also stick with me as I go through the two books.
4) Version movement, vergence movement, pursuit movement, Dorsal Simultanagnosia, The Mach Effect, mach bands, Minima rule, Minima silhouette rule, visual acuity, concave creases, and curvatures.
1. The reader starts out the chapter by explaining a certain type of agnosia. We learned what agnosia was in the last chapter. It’s the inability to put aspects of an image together to determine what they are looking at. In this chapter the author discusses dorsal simultanagnosia. In this case they have full visual fields but can only see one part of an object and that image can fade away. It’s still agnosia but not a case where the visual field is completely gone. I would explain this as seeing the world like you are looking at a puzzle. That’s how I understood it. The patient can see single parts at a time and they have to construct the image much differently than a normal healthy person would. The reader gives the example of Ms. W she sees lines and stars and put the two together and she was really looking at a flag.
This chapter also talked a lot about image construction, reconstruction and the minima rule. I found the minima rule to be a very interesting theory. The minima rule is an example of image reconstruction. After being shown a picture with certain areas missing we can still tell what the image is. I did my divergence on it this week to learn a bit more about it. I found it interesting because we use the minima rule everyday and don’t even think twice about it. I think that’s what I like best about perception is we take it for granted and I personally have never though about why I see things the way I see them or wondered if others see things the same way I do. Some examples in the reader of the minima rule were images of a watering can with area missing. Depending on what area was missing made reconstructing the image harder. If salient boundary areas were missing then it was harder to determine what the image was vs. salient interior lines. The book also gave the example of an image of a vase that was also an image of two faces looking at one another. It’s still the minima rule but a different aspect. There wasn’t anything missing from the image there was just two different perceptions of the image, faces or a vase.
2. When I looked through the text to find more information on the minima rule I didn’t find much. I did find a chapter on componential recovery which is the same theory of the minima rule just a different name. The text gives some good example of componential recovery. One example shows the stages that an airplane is drawn. The first stage shows three main parts the body and wings. Looking at it, it could not only be a plane but the bottom of a rocket or some type of post driver. The second image shows four parts of the plane body, wings, and tale. It’s beginning to look more like a plane in my opinion but could still be considered something else by someone else. The third image is the plane completed with nine parts. For me it looks like a plane because I can see all the parts and put it together in a matter of a second or less.
I find this aspect of perception very interesting. Object recovery and construction is something like I said I have never really thought about. It takes me an average person less than a second to tell what keys on the keyboard I need to press to type this entry, and less than a second to distinguish an “I” from an “L.” In a way this is like finishing each others sentences. Over time you know what the other person is going to say because you’ve been around them so long. You can determine what they are going to say because you know them. We know images. Over our lifetime we see images of all kinds and we can tell an airplane from a bird and an orange from an apple and visa versa.
3. I definitely will remember what I have learned about the minima rule and agnosia because I looked into the two topics more in depth and related to the material. I really find object construction and reconstruction interesting because it’s something I have never really though about but rely on everyday. There are some things in the reader that were covered about concave and convex lines and how they are perceived differently that I will most likely forget because it didn’t interest me as much.
4. Agnosia, simultanagnosia, image construction, reconstruction, minima rule, salient boundary, componential recovery, concave, and convex.
1) Chapter 4 discusses what we look to for cues when trying to construct parts of an object. We observe color, motion, shape, texture, and what our prior experiences have been when constructing. This chapter really focused on boundaries in objects and how they affect our perception. Crisp boundaries make it easier to define an object, especially if part of the object is out of view. Concave creases are much easier for us to define than salient because salient edges still leave some ambiguity.
The chapter also discusses the minima rule. The minima rule is defined as divinizing shapes into parts at negative minima, along lines of curvature. The rule of minima helps us define curves and makes the ripple illusion possible. It also is shown in the text with the rabbit-duck illusion. The face-vase illusion also illustrates the rule of minima.
2) This text uses the same face-vase illusion but describes it differently. My text used this image to describe face-ground segregation. The text says this image is a reversible figure-ground pattern. It says some of the properties of the figure and ground are: 1) the figure is more thing like and memorable than the ground, 2) the figure is seen as being in front of the ground, and 3) the ground is seen as unformed material and seems to extend behind the figure. My text also mentions that the contours appear to separate the figure from the ground. I found all these properties to be true no matter if I was seeing the vase, or the faces.
3) I think the minima rule will stick with me. I think this is because of the many graphical demonstrations to display the rule. Now when I think about the rule, I immediately picture the illusions that the reader and the text showed. I think the information about the concave cusps, angles, and salient edges will fade from my memory. There was a lot of information involved, and even after reading both materials I struggled to sort all the information out.
4) concave cusps, salient edges, face-ground segregation, reversible figure-ground pattern, countours
1.In Chapter four, I liked the part about the minima rule. It mainly said that we divide shapes into parts at a negative minima, along lines of curvature. For example, it predicts parts seen on the ripple. The rule explains why the parts in the ripple change when looked at upside down. The chapter also talks about the minima rule for silhouettes. It said that we divide silhouettes into parts at concave cusps and negative minima of curvature. An example of this in the reader was the face goblet illusion. The parts picked out by the minima rule are described in one word; like nose, lip, or chin. Then the complex descriptions are not part of the face, just a region, like the area from the nose to the lower neck. The minima rule for silhouettes also talks about transversality; where two lines intersect one another. The rule also says that symmetry is easier to detect that repetition because we compare part to part of an image. This part of the rule is in relation to the Mach Effect by Earnest Mach.
Another part of the chapter talked about dorsal simultanagnosia. This is where the attention to one or more objects but this image will slip away. People that have this commonly say that they are basically blind.
2.My textbook talks about the Mach Band Effect. It says that there are thin dark bands on the dark side of light-dark borders and vice versa. This is explained by the illumination of one area of the retina affects a response of receptors in another part of the retina. Both texts talk about the Mach Effect; however the reader and the textbook talk about the effect in completely different ways.
3.I will remember the minima rule, especially in relation to the face goblet illusion. I will also remember the dorsal simultanagnosia because vision disorders are interesting and the book explains it in a story format.
4.Minima rule, concave cusps, transversality, Mach Effect, dorsal simultanagnosia, Mach band, retina, receptors.
1) The reader talks about a lot of rules but a ffew of the more interesting ones were the minima rule, and the salient parts. It says that we divide things into parts at a negative curvatures, and that we divide sillouhettes by concave cusps into things that can be described by one word. The salient boundries rule says that we chose between the figure and the ground and make the ground into more salient parts.
2)The text book talks about border owner ship which coincides with the minima rule where we divide sillouhettes into one word figures. For example the Goblet picture that can also be seen as two faces.
3)I will remember the minima rule the most because of the goblet example. Also I thought the Williams syndrome and the Dorsal Stimutanagnosia because I thought that was really interesting to know that people can percieve things that way.
4)Dorsal STimutanagnosia, Williams Syndrome, Minima Rule, Negative Curvatures, Concave Cusps, Salient Boundries.
1) The readers main focus is talking about how people construct different objects that they see. How some objects are easier to understand and pick up because a certain amount of the outline is present while the same amount of markings can be right in front of you but you might not be able to pick up what the object is because of the lines they give you. It also talks about dorsal simultanagnosia a disease that only lets a person see certain parts of an object or need help constructing whole scenes. In the reader it gives an example of a man riding a camel with a mountain in the background. A person with dorsal simultanagonosia would be able to construct the mountain and have to look later to see the man on the camel. The book also talks about Williams syndrome a disease that is related the seventh chromosome and affects 1 in 20,000 people. It is another spatially challenged syndrome that affects people not being able to construct different objects properly. This was the most interesting part of the chapter mainly because of the interesting side effect of people with Williams syndrome and how they are able to remember hours of music while not being able to even be able to sometime read or even read music. They are able to just remember the song after a couple times hearing it and than sometimes sing it back in perfect pitch.
2) The text talks a lot about how people receive different messages and how it is sent back to the brain. For instance what you see with your left eye is sent to the right part of your brain and vice versa. It also talks a lot about how people perceive size and distance, which is related to the reader on how people are able to construct outlines and shapes. The text I have didn't talk about the actually shapes and outlines changing how we see things as much as it talked about the distance that people are from each other and what is running through the brain. I would have never thought that you take in so much information to just figure out what a certain outline is and what the shape may or may not be, which is all based off of past things that you have seen or came across. My text went into a lot of detail about a study conducted in 1959 called the Ames room. Which had 3 different men stand in a certain spot off a room and it made them look different sizes even though they were all the same size. Its just fascinating to see the way you can trick your eye or brain and what all happens to get that image back to your brain.
3) I think the most interesting part of the reader was when they talked about the different types of diseases or syndromes that are happening everywhere. I would have never thought that a person would not be able to see certain parts of a picture even if it was right in front of them, or tell more about an object purely based on the amount of outlines it gives you. Also the ALS and Williams syndrome are both two things that I will look into because of how I have found them interesting. The different ways that we are able to trick our eye with optical illusions was pretty interesting also. Also in the reader something I found interesting was how they would show you a goblet but some people would only see two faces. There was many more interesting things to read about in this chapter than there was down time in the read. The stuff that was a little slow was when they were talking about how we actually construct things and how we try to do it in 3d.
Terms: ALS, Dorsal Simultanagnosia, ames room, curve, boundaries, minima rule.
1) The reader begins the explanation of Ms. W's condition by saying that we all carve out visual world into parts. The focus of this explanation throughout the chapter is on shapes of objects and parts. To explain how good we are at seeing things as a whole, the 2D simple drawing of the desert was given. We recognize that picture as quickly as we recognize a color photograph.
The reader also talks about transversal intersection which I took to mean that if two shapes interpenetrate at a random point, you can almost always tell where that point is. One of the rules in the chapter is the minima rule. This says that we divide shapes into parts at negative minima, along lines of curvature, of the principal curvatures.
A small part in the chapter really stuck out to me. It said the way we carve the world visually should affect how we carve it verbally. The way we carve up the world verbally depends on how we carve it up visually. The reader doesn't say much more about this.
The Mach effect was also discussed which I'm still not exactly sure how to define. It has something to do with perception of contours and matching parts.
2) It was hard for me to find relating information in my text. My text is not very detailed and I don't really like it. The only thing my book really says about the subjects covered in the reader is that our perception of differences in structures is instantaneous.
3) After reading the material, I think the idea of a strong relation between our visual and verbal worlds. It was also interesting to think about how easy it is for us to see an entire picture from something as simple as a line drawing. For most of this chapter, I felt pretty bored and like the author repeated the same ideas in different words. This chapter was just kind of plain to me. I don't think I will remember much of it.
Terms: transversal intersection, minima rule, Mach effect, contours
1) Chapter four of our reader is about the way we construct our visual world as active creators of parts. This chapter builds on the rules a normally functioning brain follows as it constructs from a visual image. These additional rules such as the Rule of Concave Creases, and the Minima Rule which influence such things as how we divide shapes, or the Minimize Rule whcih influences how we see silouettes, as well as a number of rules dealing with the salience of boundaries which, for example, helps us to interpret and differentiate between figure and ground.
As in prior chapters, the construction process is most apparent through case examples of individuals whose inability to perform certain constructive actions in visual processing alters their perception in dramatic ways, and illuminate the processes that work effectively for most individuals. For example, the case of Mrs W. who suffered from Dorsal Simultagnosia which caused her to "see" (process) parts of an image, and rendered her functionally blind. Also, Williams Syndrome was a genetic disorder discussed which renders those with this disorder incapable of putting parts together in meaningful ways for daily functioning, such as is required to learn to read, etc.... Lastly, a discussion of Paraprosopia highlights how some people with schizophrenia see faces turn from normal to grotesque, by visually creating features that aren't there as the sufferer looks on in fear.
The stories of this chapter are no less fascinating than in the earlier chapters, and I enjoyed them very much on many levels - human interest, illustrative understanding, and style in general. I also enjoyed the general concepts overall, but my favorite quote was "the way you carve the world visually should effect the way you carve it verbally as well" (Hoofman, 1998). This made the visual rules more relevant than I had realized to our conscious experience of perception.
2) The Goldstein text discussed a couple of intriguing models similar to Hoffman's rules of how we construct parts into a whole. The text called the first model the "Structural-Description Model" which is based on constructing from 3-D volumes called Volemetric Features which can be used to construct the overall shape of an object. In this theory, we recognize by components called geons (geometric Ions) which we put together to make a whole. The other possible model in the text for how we construct is called the "Image Description Model. This model is based on stored information that allows for recognition of an object from different viewpoints. This is similar to the concept of association required for visual recognition in the first chapter of our reader.
As for the visual rules, the Goldstein text showed a number of similar visuals as the reader including the rabbit/duck demonstration, the reversible face figures, and more. The textbook referred to the rules considering the salience of boundaries as "perceptual segregation", or the "figure-ground problem" and equated this to when objects are seen as separated from the rest of their scene. Goldstein writes about laboratory experiments to test how perceptual segregation works by asking subjects to respond to impressions of figure-ground images. There was also a discussion of how researchers have studied what neurons do when responding to figure ground by testing monkeys for neural responses when presented with figure-ground images. The most important finding from the animal studies was that neural processing of figure-ground happens in the VI, a lower area for processing - so researchers concluded that this area was getting feedback form higher-level areas of the visual processing system (Goldstein, 2007).
3) I will probably remember the disorders, and the concepts of how we our active creators and carve our world out according to visual rules. I will also remember many of the visual concpts, but I will probably more quickly forget the specifics/verbiage of the rules.
4) Dorsal Simultagnosia, Williams Syndrome, Paraprosopia, Rule of Concave Creases, Minima Rule, Minimize Rule,Salient Boundaries, Structural-Description Model, Perceptual Segregation. Geons, Image Description Model.
1.)Chapter 4 of the reader focuses on how we construct the parts of what we view. We base what we view on 5 major components; texture, color, experience, motion and shape. In the beginning of the chapter a story about an idividual with dorsal simultanagnosia was given to illustrate how we sometimes take for granted how our brain has the ability to add up different parts to create a whole picture. In the case of Ms. W, she could only see one part and then would have to guess what she was seeing by just the small part of what the rest of us would be able to see. Another example of a disorder relative to this chapter is Williams syndrome when an individual can't assemble parts together in the right spots.
Throughout the chapter, shape was primarily examined and how was are able to view through shape. A few different rules concerning shape were discussed including transversal intersection, where, when 2 objects meet to make one object. We can distinguish that these are 2 separate objects because they meet in a concave crease. Another rule that the chapter spends some time discussing is the minima rule. This rule states that your brain divides things into part along negative minima (which I interpreted from the pictures as where there is the smallest distance from one side to the other) along curves. This rule can also be used for silhouttes and those are also divided at concave and negative areas. The Mach effect deals with minima and how we find it easier to perceive symmetry rather than repitition. However, Baylis and Driver found that when figure and ground are involved, we are able to identify repitition easier. Salience is also taken into consideration when looking at certain shaped objects. A salient cusp has a deep curve with an angle. The sharper the angle, the more salient it is.
2.)My text described salience as the amount that a line stands out, where our reader describes it relating to an angle. Unfortunately, my textbook didn't really elaborate on the other topics that the reader discussed, like the minima rules, tranversal intersections, dorsal simultaganosia, or William's syndrome, but it does talk about the figure-ground segregation. In the case of the face/vase picture, the object that we see it what we consider the figure, regardless of color. This image seems more memorable or "thing-like" to us so we pick it out of the picture. My text also gave a picture that if you looked from left to right, the figure and background shifted because on one side there were symmetrical figures that were black on a white background and on the right there were white symmetrical figures on a black background and youre brain tends to identify symmetrical figures with more ease and more memorable than figures that do not have symmetry.
3.) My favorite part was learning about the disorder associated with our visual perception. These always interest me the most. Also, I thought it was interesting how in certain situations our brain is able to easily identify repeating figures rather than symmetrical ones and vice versa.
4.) Terms: Dorsal Simultaganosia, William's syndrome, transversal intersection, concave crease, minima, salience, figure-ground
1.The reader for chapter four discusses how we are able to curve our visual world into parts in order to construct and recognize objects. There are no basic set of shapes for a person to abide by, only general guidelines to satisfy. The construction of parts satisfies four conditions: the object will not change if the observer adjusts his or her view a bit, the object will not change even if the configuration of the overall object does, the ability to construct parts comes from the retinal image on the eye, and understanding that a person constructs parts on a wide variety of objects with larger meaning better. In order to perceive parts of an object, one must follow the rules and principles of curvatures. There are three principle curvatures where the surface can curve differently in different directions: zero, no curve; positive, where surface normals point outward; and negative, where surface normals point inward. Curvature at a smooth crease is a negative curvature in accordance with Rule #15 which states, the division of shapes into parts is at negative minima along the lines of curvature. An example of this rule is the face-goblet illusion, where negative minima are used to divide the two images. The point made in the reader I found to be the most interesting was the idea that a person judges two constructions as being similar if similar language is used to describe both parts. In other words, two interpretations may be used to lead to change in part boundaries resulting in a change in parts. This idea illustrates the fact that the way we carve our visual world is not arbitrary. Furthermore, this notion is supported by Baylis and Driver, who stated we create parts “pre-attentively.”
2.In a chapter titled, “Patterns and Edges,” my text explains the organization of perception. Our visual system operates to produce perceptible figures, objects, and meaningful patterns. In turn, those figures and coherent patterns that we experience in consciousness exist only in our minds, and they are the result of several levels of active processing and interpretation applied to the retinal image. Similar to the reader, the text mentions the importance of figure and ground. The text elaborates more on the importance for understanding figure and ground. Seen as the most primitive example of perceptual organization is when we see a 2-D figure on a background. The text defines a figure simply as a group of contours that has some kind of object-like properties in our consciousness. A shape is thought to be a figure, but shapes can also form part of the background, known as ground, for which the figure emerges. This definition of figure and ground gave a lot more information on the importance and reason for the idea. The reader addressed the importance of figure and ground as a generalization of Rule #19 seen in Rule #20 which states, for salient parts, one must choose figure and ground so the figure has more salient parts providing stronger boundaries. In addition to providing more background on topics addressed in the reader, the text also introduces new and different concepts for perception: law of proximity, which states that elements close to one another tend to be perceived as a unit or figure; law of good continuum, which states elements that appear to follow the same direction tend to be grouped together; law of closure, which states that we tend to ignore gaps between elements in order to form a closed figure; and lastly, the law of Pragnanz, which states that the organization of the visual array into perceptual objects will always be as “good” as the prevailing conditions allow. Finding material that correlated between the text and reader was not difficult because both books had chapters dedicated specifically to perception.
3.The part from the material covered in the reader and text that I feel I am more likely to remember is the idea that all perception is done in a logical manner. I found it interesting that perception is not only organized but it renders our interpretation of the stimulus into something that is regular and systematic. Moreover, our interpretation of parts is based on our visual language description, meaning everyone encompasses his or her own schema for construction. One of the points made in the reader that I feel I will not remember as vividly is the explanation for our principle curvature in relation to rules #15 and #16 which are based on the division of parts based on negative minima and the division of silhouettes at concave cusps and negative minima curvature.
4.Object, configuration, construction, retinal image, principles of curvature, surface normals, negative curvature, negative minima, part boundaries, visual world, arbitrary, pre-attentively, perceptible, figure and ground, contours, salient parts, law of proximity, law of good continuum, law of closure, law of Pragnanz, visual array, stimulus, systematic, concave cusps
1. In looking at Chapter 4, its shows various ways that we construct different objects. There were some elements and rules that help us to construct objects such as parts, the spatial relationships between them, and various other measures. The reader begins the chapter talking about two visual disorders such as dorsal simultanagnosia and agnosia. Dorsal simultanagnosia people have a problem with restriction of attention. They are able to focus or one or maybe to parts of an object but then it soon fades away. As for agnosia, they are not able to see at all. It started off with this because he wanted to show the different forms of constriction. We are able to construct 3D shapes from 2D curves. The best was to do that is to divide shapes into parts and describe parts and their spatial relationships. In constructing parts of objects, we must satisfy four conditions; they should change is view is moved, if object change configuration, being able to construct parts through retinal images of your eye, and being able to construct parts on a variety of objects. Also transversal intersection has an impact on our ability to construct objects. This when points and two objects intersect by forming a concave crease. The staircase figure showed a great example of the rule of concave creases which is used when you construct polygonal objects. Another key aspect is the principle curvature. This can be positive, negative, or zero. The terms figure and ground come into play when discussing the positive or negative curvature. A rule used throughout this chapter was the minima rule. This is when a shape is divided into parts at negative minima, along the lines of curvature. The minima rule can be applied when you looking at the ripple and the tipped vase figure. The minima rule for silhouettes was used when you make a part boundary at each concave cusp and the point of highest curvature in each principle curvature. My favorite figure the reader used was the one that looked similar to a challis and it has the two faces. This shows that pieces can be missing from a object but we are still able o construct them due to knowing the correct boundaries and parts. Boundary salience comes into play in utilizing rules 17-20. To make all the boundaries more salient you must increase the curvatures which are shown in the face-goblet illusion. In creating parts, all these rules intertwine with each other. You prefer to have fewer parts, shorter part cuts, convex parts, and more salient boundaries which make objects easier to construct. The chapter ends with another disorder that alters your visual construction which is schizophrenics with paraprosopia. This is when the view a face and think its normal first. Then in seconds the face transforms into a vampire or something that will harm them. The whole face isn’t transformed but different parts are. The reason the book used this example was to show that in order for us to construct object we have to first construct parts and ensemble the parts into coherent spatial relationships.
2. The text had a few things that were connected to the reader. When it talked about spatial layout, it said that it is the full structure of a scene. This ties in with the reader because in order to construct objects there has to be the right spatial relationship otherwise the object won’t be constructed correctly. Another concept that applied to this is spatial perception. The text elaborated on monocular and binocular summation. Monocular is being able so see with one eye and binocular summation is an advantage for detecting objects when having two eyes. This would have to do with having the proper spatial relationship because a person with one eye may not be able to construct those proper spatial rules. Also this would have an effect on the construction of objects. Defects of visual attention kind of tie into the disorders the reader stated. It says that visual defects happen two ways which are neglect and extinction. Neglect has to do with visual attention and not being able to respond to stimuli in the contralesional visual field. I think this goes back to the reader when he described dorsal simultanagnosia by not being able to attend to one or two objects. Extinction is similar to neglect but this is when you’re not able to perceive a stimulus due to the presence of another stimuli. The text really didn’t get into the various rules. I was hoping to relate some of the rules back to some things in the text. I liked how the text talked about change blindness. This is when a person is unable to detect change between two scenes. This has to do with illusions in a way because we sometimes miss the bigger picture in which the scene may change meaning.
3. In comparing the reader and the text I think I’ll remember some of the terms shown in the reader. Spatial relationships have an impact on the way you perceive certain things. Also things the rules were pretty easy to remember due to the various examples and figures Hoffman used. Another thing I’ll be able to identify is the transversal intersection because of the staircase figure. I would be looking for where the two parts or objects intersect.
4. Dorsal simultanagnosia, spatial relationships, agnosia, transversal intersection, concave crease, principle curvature, figure, ground, Minima rule, Boundary salience, paraprosopia, monocular, binocular, contralesional visual field, neglect, extinction, change blindness.
1) In chapter four of the reader, Visual Intelligence, Hoffman talked about geomentric construction. One of the questions addressed in this chapter was Why are parts so helpful to recognition? This question made me contemplate our vision and how we construct certain figures and how our eyes adjust to certain figures. Stated in the chapter is answered this question by saying that parts are so helpful to recognition because most objects are opaque and many objects are not rigid. I think the main points the author was trying to make were that our eyes adjust to different geomentrically shaped objects differently by using curvatures, concave and convex intersecting points, and boundaries. Some examples the author used to address his point were the Famous Schroder Staircase, which presented concave creases, "figure", and "ground". He also used the cylindrical figures which describe principal curvurtures. The author also used the shaded curvatured disks with scribbles down the center that was first described by the psycholoist Fred Attneave.
2) One of the points discussed in chapter four of the reader was how the physicist Ernst Mach stated that observers are more sensitive to symmetry than to repetition within a visual. I thought this statement was exceptionally complex and was curious to know what my textbook had to say about Mach and his theories. In the textbook it discusses Mach's hypthoesis which is that illumination of one area of the retina affects the response of receptors in another nearby area of the retina. This hypothesis makes me wonder if that is why observers are more sensitive to symmetry than reptition becvause of the receptors in the retina. The textbook does not go into much more detail about Mach's research or more in depth about his hypthoesis. However; I'm curious to know the conclusion of why Mach thinks observers are more sensitive to symmetry rather than repitition because surely, the retina and his hypothesis have to be correlated to one another.
3) I will probably mostly remember the description and examples Hoffman used to describe how our eyes percieve certain geomentrically constructed shapes. Also, I most likely will continue to ponder the question "Why are parts so helpful to recognition?" This question is fascinating to me, and I want to continue to research it more because it's so open-ended and could be answered a number of ways, and I'm curious to know what further research has been done to answer this question.
4) Concave, convex, principal curvature, geometrically shaped, intersecting points, boundaries
1) This chapter talks about how we recognize objects. We first divide shapes into parts, then describe the parts and their spatial relationship, and finally look for a match in our memory. Since we don’t see all of an object at once and sometimes they are not rigid, we can still recognize them from their visible parts which give us a stable description of the object. To be able to recognize the many different shapes objects have, we have to identify the points where two objects meet which are called transversal intersections. To construct parts of polygonal objects we divide shapes into parts along concave creases (Rule 14) and if the object is a smooth shape, we first determine which part is figure and which part is ground. To choose whether a surface is figure or ground, we identify the principal directions in which the surface curve most and least, and the principal curvatures which are the corresponding curvatures. Then we divide shapes into parts at negative minima, along lines of curvature, of the principal curvatures (Rule 15). Moreover, we choose figure and ground so that figure has more salient part boundaries (Rule19) or more salient parts (Rule 20). To construct parts of silhouettes we divide silhouettes into parts at concave cusps and negative minima of curvature (Rule 16). When determining figure and ground of an object, we change its parts because the change in part boundaries. In this case we follow rules to increase the salience of a cusp (Rule 17) or a smooth boundary (Rule 18). I really liked the way the reader breaks down the whole process of object recognition and also lets you experience it through the examples and figures. I also liked how this chapter explains how we construct illusions part-by-part such as the face-goblet illusion.
2) The textbook devotes a whole chapter to explain the process of object recognition by describing five approaches which are the Gestalt, Computational, Feature Integration Theory, and the Recognition by Components. The Gestalt approach explains that we follow certain rules to organize small parts into wholes. It is also concerned with our ability to separate objects from one another which is called figure-ground segregation. There are several factors that determine which area is figure and which area is ground such as symmetry, size, and boundary salience as explained also in the reader. The computational approach treats the visual system as if it was a computer which recognizes objects by stages. The object’s image starts at the retina, then we identify edges and primitives, and finally we group primitives by size and orientation to perceive a three-dimensional object. The Feature Integration Theory proposes that object perception occurs according to a sequence of stages. In the first stage the figure is analyzed by our visual system and determines the existence of basic features by breaking the figure down to its units. In the second stage the features are combined resulting in our perception of the object and then recognized by matching it to the information stored in our memory. This approach is very similar to what is explained in the book matching most of the stuff I have in my mind map. The Recognition by Components theory explains that we divide an object into its parts which are three-dimensional shapes called volumetric primitives or geons. There was a lot of information in the textbook in regards object recognition. The textbook did a great job laying out all the theories that have contributed to the understanding of this process, but the reader had a better impact on me because it summarized it and blended it all together to make one general theory that is easier to understand.
3) I remember most of what the reader had to say rather than the textbook. I don’t think I’ll remember detail by detail but I understood the overall process of object recognition. I think is really interesting how this process can be broken down into rules that help us recognize any type of object depending on its shape. I also liked how the reader explained why we perceive two different figures in the face-goblet illusion.
4) Transversal intersections, concave creases, figure and ground, principal directions, principal curvatures, minima rule, part boundaries, concave cusps, Gestalt approach, Computational approach, Feature Integration Theory, Recognition by components approach, retina, geons.
1)In chapter 4 Hoffman discusses how we each carve our own shapes into the world, and how we organize them. The message he tries to convey in this chapter is that we are all 'master part makers'. He goes on further to discuss how this is so. Hoffman uses many different ideas to show this. One of them is the idea of generic views, which has four rules. Our mind quickly picks out these rules and carves objects into shapes. Hoffman helpfully elaborates and says its alot like when our hands and feet move, we change shape, but we can still tell that the overall figure is a body. From here on we also discuss the minima rule where we divide along minimal curvatures and negative minima. We also discuss figure ground relationships, and how to make objects more salient. This is illustrated by a figure in rule 20. The book refers to these silhouettes as a dog bone. But I'll remember this figure because when I first saw it I thought it looked like a maxi pad. It illustrates that we like simplify things, we don't choose the maxi pad with the longest "cut" (vertical cut) We choose the one with the horizontal cut, because it makes the object the most salient. Overall, Hoffman's message is clear. We must construct parts to make objects, however, these objects must assemble in coherent spatial relationships. This is where rules 14-20 come in.
2) The text encompassed the rabbit/duck and reversible face figures into the lecture. We also saw these in the reader. These two figures must hold some regard in getting the visual construction point across. I was introduced to a concept that I had heard before, which was the figure-ground problem. Again we refer back to the reversible faces. The "problem" here is that our brain must decide line and edge assignments to create the figures of these shapes. If we do it in one way, we see faces. If we do it the opposite way, we will see a vase. It seems that the figure and ground 'compete' and go on to make an optical illusion. This whole chapter was about how we separate this competition to make logical spatial assumptions.
3) I think I will definitely remember more from the reader than the text in this chapter. I enjoy the little beginning tidbits the reader offers. Dorsal Simultanagnosia was interesting to read about, it's kind of like an attention deficit as the reader says. It was later figured out that parts of the cortex, affected by a stroke, had trouble processing more than one piece of information at a time. I will also remember the maxi pad looking figure in rules 19 and 20. It's just a reminder to keep things simple, and construct objects that seem most salient.
4) minima, minimal curvatures, figure/ground, saliency, logical spatial assumptions, dorsatl simultanagnosia, cortex
Chapter 4 talks about object recognition as a point of reference such as when we are looking at and object think it is one thing and in actuality it is a different thing. With the use of prior knowledge to identify color, motion, shape, an the texture of the object. depending on what the object is we can move it with the manipulation of the mind such as the minima rule of silhouettes, and the curve of geometrically, with the interpretations of objects. Or the use of the Mach's effect of the optics, mechanism, wave dynamics, and vision in what we see one thing or one image that is cut out and the cues are given telling the brain that it is a figure or a part of an image which we do recognizes used by Biederman & Blickle testing the stimuli as contours are deleted, making us see what we see.
In the text by Goldstien (2007) chapter 5 relates to the Hoffman chapter 4. In perceiving objects, perceptual organization, and the law of Praganz resulting structure is as simple as possible. Rubin's reversible face-vase figure, were the ground is seen as unformed material and seems to extend behind the figure. The Border ownership although figures and ground share a contour, the border is associated with the figure. Four factors that that help us see and object is the symmetry, size, orientation, and meaning, which help us in seeing the object or figure, where as if the we are more senstive to horizontal and vertical orientations is called oblique effect.
I think in remembering this chapter it signify the changes in the brains, by having a stroke and the effects to which dorsal simultanagnosia which can effect in not allowing someone to see or diffident a change in shapes or movement that allows us to manipulate a object in are minds
Minima,ground&curvatures, spatial, context delay period, image-description models,oblique effect,four factors in recognition,border ownership.
1)Chapter 4 in the reader was entitled spontaneous morphing. The chapter begins discussing agnosia and how it is the loss of ability to piece objects of an image together. The main point of the chapter is that we construct visual images due to cues that have been conditioned throughout our lives. During construction we use motion, color, shape, texture ques along with our past experiences to construct objects in our visual worlds. Some of the rules that I found interesting were rule 14 and rule 15-17. Rule 14 is the rule of concave creases and it states that we should divide shapes onto parts along concave creases. This would be the key to constructing polygonal objects. Rule 15-17 deals with minima construction. The minima rule dictates that we divide shapes into parts at negative minima of the shape. This rule helps explain how the ripple turns into a new ripple when turned upside down. Dashed lines on the ripple are the neg minima of the object. When turned the neg minima turns into positive maxima and gives us a whole new object to construct. The next rule is #16 and is the minima for silhouettes. This rule states that we divide parts at concave cusps/ neg minima. The face goblet illusion is my favorite in the entire chapter. I feel it gives the best example of the neg minima rules.
2) I found it difficult to find information that relates to both my reader and text. In ch 5 of the text it displayed the face goblet example as the reader did. It explained that the reason we see faces or goblets depends on figure-ground segregation. The face goblet ex. Is reversible and can be perceived as two black faces over a white background or a white goblet over a black background. The chapter mainly focuses on the grouping of small parts into larger units or the perceptual organization (Gestalt).
3) The aspect of this chapter I will remember is the minima rules/ face-goblet illusion. I fell that these rules were explained in both books well and helped me understand why we see two objects.
4)Ques, minima rules, Gestalt principalis,
1.)Chapter four starts out by talking about dorsal simultanagnosia, which is a disorder that causes a restriction of the ability to see objects as a whole. Each case differs in severity, but for Mr. S. his case is much worse than most patients. In most cases a patient can see only one object or parts of an object at one time. This disorder can be so severe that patients will seem as if they are blind. Ms. W who is a patient of this disorder, was studied by a neuropsychologist and was asked to guess what an object was after seeing part of it. When she was shown a pitcher of water she first saw the handle and thought that it was a suitcase, but then she saw the glass, remembered the handle, and came to the conclusion that it was a pitcher of water. Another interesting part of this chapter is the different illusions that it presents. for one illusion it shows a picture of a goblet, but some people also see two faces looking at one another. Some other fun illusions are of the rabbit-duck and the hawk-goose. There are some very interesting rules in chapter 4. Rule 14 is the rule of concave creases which tells the reader to divide shapes into parts along concave creases. The example for this rule is the famous Schroder staircase. Rule 15 is the minima rule, which tells us to divide shapes into parts at negative minima, along lines of curvature, of the principle curvatures. Some examples in the book are the tipped vase and the ripple. There are a few other rules in this chapter but rules 14 and 15 capture my interest the most. This chapters main focus is on objects and how we construct those objects. Hoffman describes that we construct objects in many different ways using motion, color, texture, prior experience, and shape.
2.) The Goldstein text didn't relate as well to this topic as it did to some of the other chapters in the reader. The text had a few illusions that correlated with the reader. One illusion is the picture of black and white dots that can form a dalmation dog and the other illusion is of six cirlces that can look like six circles or nine shapes. The text did explain that figure and ground determines whether we see the goblet or the two faces in the face-goblet illusion.
3.)I think that I will definitely remember some of the interesting illusions such as the face-goblet and the rabbit-duck illusion. I will always remember the ripple because it is reviewed quite a bit in the reader. I will probably forget some of the rules that I didn't find as memorable and also some information from the text since I haven't gotten into it as much as the reader. Also, the chapter opened up with talking about dorsal simultanagnosia, which I think is extremely intrigueing and I will hopefully remember it.
4.) Dorsal simultanagnosia, minima rule, ground and principle curvatures, concave
1) Chapter 4 is focused on spontaeous morphing. It discusses things such as dorsal stimultanagnosia, what parts are and used for,and what different rules are. The reader explains that dorsal stimultanagnosia is a disorder where an individual only sees parts of an object, not the entire object as a whole. Usually, people with this disorder had previously suffered from something else, such as a stroke, before they are diagnosed with this disorder. With this disorder, their attention is restricted of what they can see and focus on at one time. I found this to be extremely interesting, because I have never had any typ of vision problems. I can't imagine how living with a disorder like that would change your perception of everything. The chapter also went into depth about what parts are. Parts include color, motion, texture, and shape. Parts are helpful to people with this disorder because they can memorize what parts an object has to recognize the object at different times, and the parts are recognizable even if they move on an object. A rule that I found interesting in the chapter was rule 14. This rule states that we divide shapes into parts along concave creases.
2) I tried finding information in my text about dorsal simultanagnosia, but failed. I did find different visual illusions in chapter 7 of my text, though. After reading the information in the reader, it's interesting now looking at these illusions and analysing them from the information I learned. I've started to look at them and try to determine what's making them the illusion that they are and what rules may apply to them.
3) I probably will not remember all of the rules, but I do think that I will remember some of the differnt illusions shown, such as the ripple wave, and also information in dorsal simultanagnosia.
4) dorsal simultanagnosia, illusions, parts, objects
1) Chapter 4 of the reader started out talking about dorsal simultanagnosia. This disorder involves the loss of an object in the visual field due to fading. The chapter then proceeded to talk about concave and concusp creases and how we divide them along the creases. Concave creases are creases that project inward and concusp creases project outward. This leads to the minima rule, which is divide shapes into parts at negative minima. The minima rule applies to silhouettes and that we divide silhouettes into parts at concave cusps at negative minima of curvature. The rest of the chapter dealt with rules of salient boundaries and how we divide and construct objects.
2) After reviewing the text the first thing that I found was the face goblet illusion. The text described this phenomena differently than the reader but it is still the minima rule. Another issue I found in the text was that everyone constructs things individually and that this process happens in fractions of seconds.
3) I think the aspects of the chapter that I will remember best is the rules for silhouettes. My reason for this is because it really caught my attention while reading and I feel that it is a good example of how everyone sees things differently at different times.
4) minima rule, concave/concusp creases
1) Chapter 4 begins to explain how we go about constructing more complex figures, rather than simply creating boundaries and edges which was discussed in Ch 3. The emphasis is on explaining how we see “parts” of objects (in contrast to other theories discussed in the text) and how we distinguish between figure and ground. Hoffman discusses four basic rules/conditions which you use when constructing parts of objects, since as always there are countless ways you could cut up an object into parts. The first and second rules are that the parts shouldn’t change if you change your view a bit, or the object changes it’s configuration a bit; this follows from the rule of generic views discussed in the beginning. The third is pretty obvious , that you need to be able to construct the part from the 2d image at your eye (as opposed to having to touch the object or something I imagine), and last the way you construct the parts should extend to a wide number of different objects.
His rules are kind of complex and difficult to understand I thought, specifically rules 14-20 were kind of difficult for me to grasp and think about. His descriptions made sense but trying to use them and think about other examples not in the book was very hard for me. What seemed most important to me though is that he could show that we use the same rules every time we form part boundaries, and that by switching from figure to ground and back again we may use different parts of the edge/boundary, but the same rules. The duck/rabbit and the hawk/goose images showed how when we switch images but keep the same figure the parts are seen as the same; e.g. the eye is an eye in both images, an ear becomes a bill; and the head of the goose is the tail of the hawk.
2) The text uses many of the original “gestalt laws” as opposed to the more sophisticated rules discussed in VI. In this way the text is more a more comprehensive list of the history and diversity of views regarding object recognition as opposed to VI which is one theory which attempts to bring together these diverse views.
Regarding figure and ground, the gestalt psychologists believed that this separation was the first step in object recognition. VI doesn’t say anything about the order of implementing the rules (though we might assume the follow a similar order to how they are presented in the book) but naturally would agree that this is an important aspect of obj. recognition. Many of the research findings discussed in the text follow in line with VI’s more basic rules (e.g. rule of generic views). Vecera and co-workers (2002) found that objects in the lower part of a picture (but not in the left or ride side) are more likely to be viewed as figure, and similarly Kleffner and Ramachandran (1992) demonstrated that objects are generally perceived as though light was shining from above. Both of these are the way we usually encounter objects. Most objects rest on the ground (thus lower than the background), and the sun and most lighting is overhead. Conversely rarely are things lit from underneath, and occur equally in the right or left visual field explaining why these are not favored.
3) I will probably forget many of the differences between structural-description and image-description models of object recognition mainly because I am not convinced by them (though the Geon stuff I’ve learned about in several classes so this will no doubt stick). The difficulty of some of VI’s rules might make these hard to remember, but the overall arguments in both the text and VI will remain. These include the importance that distinguishing figure from ground plays in object perception. That various rules or heuristics like those suggested by the Gestalt psychologists help us to deal with the fundamental problem of vision. Some aspects of object recognition are intuitive so these will stick. The light-from-above hypothesis, that most visual fields are horizontal or vertical in nature, the basic gestalt rules of proximity, continuation, similarity, etc.
4) Figure, ground, configuration, rule of generic views, part boundaries, Gestalt laws, object recognition, light-from-above-heuristic.