Gilbert's very interesting talk last night reminded me of a book I read a few years ago on the rules that our brain uses to create what we see. It was a fascinating read.
http://www.cogsci.uci.edu/%7Eddhoff/vi.html
He has created a number of Java applets to demonstrate how we create the motions that we see.
http://www.cogsci.uci.edu/%7Eddhoff/vi6.html
-- Bill
On April 13, 2005 10:14 am, Bill Reid wrote this amazing epistle:
Gilbert's very interesting talk last night reminded me of a book I read a few years ago on the rules that our brain uses to create what we see. It was a fascinating read.
http://www.cogsci.uci.edu/%7Eddhoff/vi.html
He has created a number of Java applets to demonstrate how we create the motions that we see.
http://www.cogsci.uci.edu/%7Eddhoff/vi6.html
-- Bill
A followup to the idea of how the brain interprets what it sees. After the meeting someone brought up the idea of 3D surds (sorry I can't remember your name). A surd is a random small thing. In this context, a series of random pixels used to produce a 3D image. The first use of surds I encountered was in a different context. It was a table of random three letter combinations, with actual words removed. The idea was to see how the mind would intrepret the surds, when read or spoken. Hopefully this would give insight into language and thought processes, much like the Rorshach (I can't remember the spelling of this anymore) ink blot tests. Since the brain likes patterns (I gather this is a primate thing) it tries to make sense out of randomness. A fascinating area.
I might submit ASCII line printer art might, to a small extent, fit in with the concept of 3D images. Mostly in terms of the illusion of depth and perspective rather than from the point of view of Gilberts presentation. Although oddly enough I saw an image intended for an inkjet printer with the red-cyan ink combined with ASCII art. I could be wrong, but I think there is a *NIX program which would produce this from older ASCII art.
Later Mike
According to Mike Pfaiffer:
A followup to the idea of how the brain interprets what it sees. After the meeting someone brought up the idea of 3D surds (sorry I can't remember your name). A surd is a random small thing. In this context, a series of random pixels used to produce a 3D image. The first use of surds I encountered was in a different context.
Actually, I think that's supposed to be SIRDS, an acronym for Single-Image Random-Dot Stereogram. (You leave the final S even in the singular form, since it's part of the acronym.)
http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/~etzpc/sirds.html
A Google search for "surd" brought up a few rather different definitions, which I leave as an exercise for the sufficiently curious... :)
I might submit ASCII line printer art might, to a small extent, fit in with the concept of 3D images. Mostly in terms of the illusion of depth and perspective rather than from the point of view of Gilberts presentation. Although oddly enough I saw an image intended for an inkjet printer with the red-cyan ink combined with ASCII art. I could be wrong, but I think there is a *NIX program which would produce this from older ASCII art.
While researching 3D imaging and stereoscopy a few months ago, I had stumbled on some examples of 3D ASCII art, but these were either stereo pairs or of the stereogram variety (like random-dot stereograms, but with repeating patterns of ASCII characters). I hadn't come across any ASCII art anaglyphs yet. Do you happen to remember where you had found that?
On April 13, 2005 04:23 pm, Gilbert E. Detillieux wrote this amazing epistle:
According to Mike Pfaiffer:
A followup to the idea of how the brain interprets what it sees. After the meeting someone brought up the idea of 3D surds (sorry I can't remember your name). A surd is a random small thing. In this context, a series of random pixels used to produce a 3D image. The first use of surds I encountered was in a different context.
Actually, I think that's supposed to be SIRDS, an acronym for Single-Image Random-Dot Stereogram. (You leave the final S even in the singular form, since it's part of the acronym.)
You could be correct. I thought it was a spelling mistake when I saw it.
http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/~etzpc/sirds.html
A Google search for "surd" brought up a few rather different definitions, which I leave as an exercise for the sufficiently curious... :)
I think this is one of the ones I was talking about. I knew my degree in Psychology might have a use one day. ;-)
I might submit ASCII line printer art might, to a small extent, fit in with the concept of 3D images. Mostly in terms of the illusion of depth and perspective rather than from the point of view of Gilberts presentation. Although oddly enough I saw an image intended for an inkjet printer with the red-cyan ink combined with ASCII art. I could be wrong, but I think there is a *NIX program which would produce this from older ASCII art.
While researching 3D imaging and stereoscopy a few months ago, I had stumbled on some examples of 3D ASCII art, but these were either stereo pairs or of the stereogram variety (like random-dot stereograms, but with repeating patterns of ASCII characters). I hadn't come across any ASCII art anaglyphs yet. Do you happen to remember where you had found that?
This was indeed the anaglyphs. I only saw two of them but didn't have the 3D glasses to view them at the time (15 years ago). I think they were in an alt.binaries.pictures newsgroup. I only saw two of them. They were "dense" ones and not the ones which resemble line art. I'll eventually go through the pictures I downloaded from the net while I was a student and see if I can find them. If I can I'll send them to you. Don't count on it very soon though. If the floppies haven't gone bad, I should still have them.
Later Mike
-
Bill Reid -
gedetil＠cs.umanitoba.ca -
Mike Pfaiffer