1. How Little Do We Need for 3-D Shape Perception?
- Author
-
Chetan Nandakumar, Antonio Torralba, and Jitendra Malik
- Subjects
Computer science ,media_common.quotation_subject ,Experimental and Cognitive Psychology ,Discrimination, Psychological ,Vision, Monocular ,Artificial Intelligence ,Perception ,Psychophysics ,Humans ,Computer vision ,Limit (mathematics) ,media_common ,Depth Perception ,Monocular ,Pixel ,business.industry ,Recognition, Psychology ,Sensory Systems ,Form Perception ,Ophthalmology ,Tilt (optics) ,Artificial intelligence ,D-Shape ,Percept ,business ,Perceptual Masking ,Photic Stimulation - Abstract
How little do we need to perceive 3-D shape in monocular natural images? The shape-from-texture and shape-from-shading perspectives would motivate that 3-D perception vanishes once low-level cues are disrupted. Is this the case in human vision? Or can top – down influences salvage the percept? In this study we probe this question by employing a gauge-figure paradigm similar to that used by Koenderink et al (1992, Perception & Psychophysics52 487 – 496). Subjects were presented degraded natural images and instructed to make local assessments of slant and tilt at various locations thereby quantifying their internal 3-D percept. Analysis of subjects' responses reveals recognition to be a significant influence thereby allowing subjects to perceive 3-D shape at high levels of degradation. Specifically, we identify the ‘medium-blur’ condition, images approximately 32 pixels on a side, to be the limit for accurate 3-D shape perception. In addition, we find that degradation affects the perceived slant of point-estimates making images look flatter as degradation increases. A subsequent condition that eliminates texture and shading but preserves contour and recognition reveals how bottom – up and top – down cues can combine for accurate 3-D shape perception.
- Published
- 2011
- Full Text
- View/download PDF