A motion sequence may be represented as a single pattern in x–y–t space; a velocity of motion corresponds to a three-dimensional orientation in this space. Motion sinformation can be extracted by a system that responds to the oriented spatiotemporal energy. We discuss a class of models for human motion mechanisms in which the first stage consists of linear filters that are oriented in space-time and tuned in spatial frequency. The outputs of quadrature pairs of such filters are squared and summed to give a measure of motion energy. These responses are then fed into an opponent stage. Energy models can be built from elements that are consistent with known physiology and psychophysics, and they permit a qualitative understanding of a variety of motion phenomena.

/pdf/spatiotemporal-energy-models-for-the-perception-of-motion-43mzze32mc.pdf

Spatiotemporal energy models for the perception of motion

Many current neurophysiological, psychophysical, and psychological approaches to vision rest on the idea that when we see, the brain produces an internal representation of the world. The activation of this internal representation is assumed to give rise to the experience of seeing. The problem with this kind of approach is that it leaves unexplained how the existence of such a detailed internal representation might produce visual consciousness. An alternative proposal is made here. We propose that seeing is a way of acting. It is a particular way of exploring the environment. Activity in internal representations does not generate the experience of seeing. The outside world serves as its own, external, representation. The experience of seeing occurs when the organism masters what we call the governing laws of sensorimotor contingency. The advantage of this approach is that it provides a natural and principled way of accounting for visual consciousness, and for the differences in the perceived quality of sensory experience in the different sensory modalities. Several lines of empirical evidence are brought forward in support of the theory, in particular: evidence from experiments in sensorimotor adaptation, visual \"filling in,\" visual stability despite eye movements, change blindness, sensory substitution, and color perception.

A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness-Authors' Response-Acting out our sensory experience

Many current neurophysiological, psychophysical, and psychological approaches to vision rest on the idea that when we see, the brain produces an internal representation of the world. The activation of this internal representation is assumed to give rise to the experience of seeing. The problem with this kind of approach is that it leaves unexplained how the existence of such a detailed internal representation might produce visual consciousness. An alternative proposal is made here. We propose that seeing is a way of acting. It is a particular way of exploring the environment. Activity in internal representations does not generate the experience of seeing. The outside world serves as its own, external, representation. The experience of seeing occurs when the organism masters what we call the governing laws of sensorimotor contingency. The advantage of this approach is that it provides a natural and principled way of accounting for visual consciousness, and for the differences in the perceived quality of sensory experience in the different sensory modalities. Several lines of empirical evidence are brought forward in support of the theory, in particular: evidence from experiments in sensorimotor adaptation, visual “filling in,” visual stability despite eye movements, change blindness, sensory substitution, and color perception.

/pdf/a-sensorimotor-account-of-vision-and-visual-consciousness-1o8kf5szfs.pdf

A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness

Let's read! We will often find out this sentence everywhere. When still being a kid, mom used to order us to always read, so did the teacher. Some books are fully read in a week and we need the obligation to support reading. What about now? Do you still love reading? Is reading only for you who have obligation? Absolutely not! We here offer you a new book enPDFd the perception of the visual world to read.

The Perception of the Visual World. By James J. Gibson. U.S.A.: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1950 (George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., London). Price 35s.

Neuronal Synchrony: A Versatile Code for the Definition of Relations?

Introduction 1. Binocular correspondence and the horopter 2. Sensory coding 3. The physiology of binocular vision 4. The limits of stereoscopic vision 5. Matching corresponding images 6. Types of disparity 7. Binocular fusion and rivalry 8. Binocular masking and transfer 9. Vergence eye movements 10. Stereo constancy and depth cue interactions 11. Depth contrrast and cooperative processes 12. Spatiotemporal aspects of stereopsis 13. Vision in the cyclopean domain 14. Development and pathology of binocular vision 15. Binocular and stereoscopic vision in animals References Subject index

Binocular Vision and Stereopsis

The perspective transformations of the retinal image, produced by either the movement of an observer or the movement of objects in the visual world, were found to produce a reliable, consistent, and unambiguous impression of relative depth in the absence of all other cues to depth and distance. The stimulus displays consisted of computer-generated random-dot patterns that could be transformed by each movement of the observer or the display oscilloscope to simulate the relative movement information produced by a three-dimensional surface. Using a stereoscopic matching task, the second experiment showed that the perceived depth from parallax transformations is in close agreement with the degree of relative image displacement, as well as producing a compelling impression of three-dimensionality not unlike that found with random-dot stereograms.

Motion parallax as an independent cue for depth perception

Similarities between motion parallax and stereopsis in human depth perception

Seeing in Depth

TO calculate the depth difference between a pair of points on a three-dimensional surface from binocular disparities, it is necessary to know the absolute distance to the surface1,2. Traditionally, it has been assumed that this information is derived from non-visual sources such as the vergence angle of the eyes3,4. It has been shown5,6 that the horizontal gradient of vertical disparity between the images in the two eyes also contains information about the fixation distance7–9. Recent results10,11, however, indicated that manipulations of the vertical disparity gradient have no effect on either the perceived shape or the perceived depth of surfaces defined by horizontal disparities. Following the reasoning of Longuet-Higgins12 and Tyler13, we suggest that vertical disparities are best understood as a consequence of perspective viewing from two different vantage points and the results we report here show that the human visual system is able to exploit vertical disparities and use them to scale the perceived depth and size of stereoscopic surfaces, if the field of view is sufficiently large.

Brian J. Rogers

Papers

Binocular Vision and Stereopsis

Motion parallax as an independent cue for depth perception

Similarities between motion parallax and stereopsis in human depth perception

Seeing in Depth

Vertical disparities, differential perspective and binocular stereopsis