Results 1 
7 of
7
MotionDisparity Interaction and the Scaling of Stereoscopic Disparity
, 2001
"... depth ambiguities. Without promoting the cues, their raw data (e.g., disparities and velocities) are in different units so that simple cuecombination strategies, such as averaging the depth estimates made using each cue, are impossible. When the missing parameters are the eye positions (vergence, g ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
depth ambiguities. Without promoting the cues, their raw data (e.g., disparities and velocities) are in different units so that simple cuecombination strategies, such as averaging the depth estimates made using each cue, are impossible. When the missing parameters are the eye positions (vergence, gaze directions, and torsions), the promotion process is referred to as depth scaling. In particular, in central gaze, the raw sensory data for the cue (velocities, disparities, etc.) are scaled by (that is, multiplied by, or multiplied by the square of) an estimate of the fixation distance. To the extent that this scaling is done accurately, the result is depth constancy: perceived depth that is independent of changes in viewing conditions. In this hapter we will limit our discussion of cue promotion to the issue of scaling by the fixation distance. We review a number of ways in which depth scaling may be accomplished. Micha
Vision Research 39 (1999) 3834  3848
"... The difference between the way in which binocular disparity scales with viewing distance and the way in which motion parallax scales with viewing distance introduces a potential indirect cue for viewing distance: the viewing distance is the only distance at which disparity and motion specify the sam ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
The difference between the way in which binocular disparity scales with viewing distance and the way in which motion parallax scales with viewing distance introduces a potential indirect cue for viewing distance: the viewing distance is the only distance at which disparity and motion specify the same depth. The present study examines whether this information is used. Two simulated ellipsoids were presented on a computer screen in complete darkness. The two ellipsoids were 6 to the left and right of straight ahead. Subjects set the width and depth of each ellipsoid to match a tennis ball, and set the distance of the one on the right to half that of the one on the left. The distance of the left ellipsoid varied between trials. On half of the trials it was static. On the other half it was rotating up and down around its frontal horizontal axis. Rotating the left ellipsoid influenced its set depth: rotating ellipsoids were set to be much more spherical. There was no influence on the set depth of the other ellipsoid, or on the set width of either. The set distance of the right ellipsoid was also unaffected. We conclude that subjects do not combine binocular disparity and motion parallax to obtain more veridical information about viewing distance. 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
How Vertical Disparities Assist Judgements of Distance
, 2001
"... The ratio of the vertical sizes of corresponding features in the two eyes' retinal images depends both on the associated object's distance and on its horizontal direction relative to the head (eccentricity). It is known that manipulations of vertical size ratio can affect perceived distance, size, d ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
The ratio of the vertical sizes of corresponding features in the two eyes' retinal images depends both on the associated object's distance and on its horizontal direction relative to the head (eccentricity). It is known that manipulations of vertical size ratio can affect perceived distance, size, depth and shape. We examined how observers use the vertical size ratio to determine the viewing distance. Do they use the horizontal gradient of vertical size ratio, or do they combine the vertical size ratio itself with the eccentricity at which it is found? Distance scaling (as measured by having subjects set an ellipsoid's size and shape to match a tennis ball) was no better when the judged object was 30 to the right of the head (where vertical size ratios vary considerably with distance) than when it was located straight ahead. Distance scaling improved when vertical disparities were presented within larger visual fields, irrespective of where this was relative to the head. Our results support the proposal that subjects use the horizontal gradient of vertical size ratio to estimate the distance of an object that they are looking at.
Distortions of distance and shape are not produced by a single continuous transformation of reach space
, 2004
"... ..."
unknown title
"... Holding an object one is looking at: Kinesthetic information on the object’s distance does not improve visual judgments of its size ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Holding an object one is looking at: Kinesthetic information on the object’s distance does not improve visual judgments of its size
unknown title
"... Distortions of distance and shape are not produced by a single continuous transformation of reach space ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Distortions of distance and shape are not produced by a single continuous transformation of reach space