Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > The Off Topic Forum
Register Forum Rules FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-17-2008, 03:27 PM   #21
COGENT
Powerplay Quarterback
 
COGENT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Exp:
Default

wow... thanks for this. I have been wondering how this is done for a while. I actually thought it was models when I first saw it last year.
COGENT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 04:01 PM   #22
photon
The new goggles also do nothing.
 
photon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

I emailed the guy with the cognitive blog, we'll see if he emails back.
__________________
Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
photon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 06:53 PM   #23
octothorp
Franchise Player
 
octothorp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: not lurking
Exp:
Default

Tilt-shifted, time-lapsed video. really gorgeous stuff.


octothorp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 08:50 PM   #24
onetwo_threefour
Powerplay Quarterback
 
onetwo_threefour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Mahogany, aka halfway to Lethbridge
Exp:
Default

I'm not a true expert, but my undergrad was psychology with emphasis on the more 'sciency' side like perception, neuropsych and experimental design and I think that photon's got it right. Our eyes constantly make saccadic movements to perceive the entire visual field, and large disparity in focus between the outer edges of the image and the central point can only mean two things. Either you're focussing on tiny objects fairly close to you at something close to your minimum focusing depth, or you're moving very quickly toward an object in the center of your visual field. Since the vestibular system is not sending any information that would lead you to believe you are moving the overall perception when you focus in on the areas of high focus is tiny objects close to you. You only notice the blurring when you look at the whole picture, and if you focus on the blurry part of the picture the effect is gone/diminished (to my eye at least).

I believe that is roughly the explanation from a neuropsychological perspective, but would defer to someone more expert than I. (Since I'm a lawyer now, it's been awhile) An interesting test would be to paralyze the eye muscles responsible for saccadic movements and then have the sujects view these pictures to see if the percepetion would change. This type of experimentation is fairly common in perceptual studies and may actually have been done somewhere. (But I couldn't find any mention)
__________________
onetwo and threefour... Together no more. The end of an era. Let's rebuild...

Last edited by onetwo_threefour; 11-17-2008 at 08:58 PM.
onetwo_threefour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 08:55 PM   #25
photon
The new goggles also do nothing.
 
photon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

I believed you right until the part about the TTX! Just kidding thanks for the post very informative. Yeah I tried to find a study but my google-fu failed.
__________________
Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
photon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 08:56 PM   #26
prarieboy
Late Bloomer
 
prarieboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Campo De Golf
Exp:
Default

That is really cool. Thanks to all who posted images
prarieboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 09:02 PM   #27
onetwo_threefour
Powerplay Quarterback
 
onetwo_threefour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Mahogany, aka halfway to Lethbridge
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by photon View Post
I believed you right until the part about the TTX! Just kidding thanks for the post very informative. Yeah I tried to find a study but my google-fu failed.

Actually I edited my post because I realized that I think I was confusing the agent used, and now I can't remember. I know there is an agent that can be used to temporarily block the action potentials that make the eye-muscles move but now I'm thinking it may not have been TTX. (Although TTX does definitely do exactly that, it is by no means specific to eye muscle tissue) Since I don't want anyone to inject themselves with something that can easily kill you I edited my post to leave it to the experts.

It was Boutulinum Toxin! Tetrodotoxin has never been used in human subjects as far as I know, but I believe it was used in some perceptual studies in animals...
__________________
onetwo and threefour... Together no more. The end of an era. Let's rebuild...

Last edited by onetwo_threefour; 11-17-2008 at 09:07 PM. Reason: Found it!!
onetwo_threefour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 09:40 PM   #28
photon
The new goggles also do nothing.
 
photon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Lol cool. Coincidence that you mentioned TTX and I recognized it because I'm listening to an audio book and they talked about some moron who swallowed a newt. Only the newt had crazy amounts of TTX in its skin (the garter snake, a natural predator, being resistant to it).

EDIT: Oh, he died.
__________________
Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
photon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 09:45 PM   #29
The Fonz
Our Jessica Fletcher
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Exp:
Default

edit

Last edited by The Fonz; 12-09-2008 at 10:22 PM.
The Fonz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 09:49 PM   #30
FurnaceFace
Franchise Player
 
FurnaceFace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: 110
Exp:
Default

I think we should use shift tilt as the photo theme soon. Give all the contributors the challenge of creating one over the next couple weeks?
__________________
FurnaceFace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 10:26 PM   #31
SebC
tromboner
 
SebC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: where the lattes are
Exp:
Default

Another cool effect to make things look small is large hyperstereoscopic 3D (two pics seperated by a large distance)... and of course, hypostereoscopic 3D (two pics seperated by a small distance) makes small things look big.
SebC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2008, 06:51 AM   #32
Daradon
Has lived the dream!
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Where I lay my head is home...
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by photon View Post
What gets me is how you can't not see the illusion. How some illusions pop back and forth between seeing it one way or the other (you see the dolphins or you don't, the girl spins clockwise or counterclockwise), but this one you can't not see everything as tiny.

I guess it just fascinates me how the brain works and how easy it is too fool the brain with just a few subtle changes to an image.
The picture that you put above doesn't seem to fool my mind as much as some of the other examples. (That airplane one is pretty neat)

Do you know why the mind is fooled in this manner?

NM, Bobble seems to have a grasp on it. What he said makes sense.
Daradon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:18 PM.

Calgary Flames
2024-25




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021 | See Our Privacy Policy