Zograscopic Viewing

Koenderink, Jan J.; Wijntjes, Maarten; Doorn, Andrea van

doi:10.1068/i0585

Cited by 23 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 17 publications

(17 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Koenderink et al [37] report on a controlled study intended to verify Zograscopic viewing. The optical arrangement comprised a 12 cm diameter lens used for iPad viewing.…”

Section: Underlying Mechanisms and Controlled Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

On Alternative Approaches to 3D Image Perception: Monoscopic 3D Techniques

Blundell

2015

3D Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the eighteenth century, techniques that enabled a strong sense of 3D perception to be experienced without recourse to binocular disparities (arising from the spatial separation of the eyes) underpinned the first significant commercial sales of 3D viewing devices and associated content. However following the advent of stereoscopic techniques in the nineteenth century, 3D image depiction has become inextricably linked to binocular parallax and outside the vision science and arts communities relatively little attention has been directed towards earlier approaches. Here we introduce relevant concepts and terminology and consider a number of techniques and optical devices that enable 3D perception to be experienced on the basis of planar images rendered from a single vantage point. Subsequently we allude to possible mechanisms for non-binocular parallax based 3D perception. Particular attention is given to reviewing areas likely to be thought-provoking to those involved in 3D display development, spatial visualization, HCI, and other related areas of interdisciplinary research. Graphical AbstractKeywords Stereopsis Á 3D perception Á Paradoxical monocular stereopsis Á Monocular 3D Á Plastic effect Á Stereoscopy by default 1 Introduction

show abstract

“…Koenderink et al [37] report on a controlled study intended to verify Zograscopic viewing. The optical arrangement comprised a 12 cm diameter lens used for iPad viewing.…”

Section: Underlying Mechanisms and Controlled Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

On Alternative Approaches to 3D Image Perception: Monoscopic 3D Techniques

Blundell

2015

3D Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It frequently happens when you look “into,” as opposed to “at,” pictures (Ames, 1925a, 1925b; Claparède, 1904; Enright, 1991; Hildebrand, 1893; Koenderink, van Doorn, & Wagemans, 2011; Pollack, 1955; Schlosberg, 1941; Schwartz, 1971), but it may also happen when you look “into” the clouds, or “into” a dirty old wall (Leonardo da Vinci, 1651). Pictorial awareness appears categorically different from more frequent modes of visual awareness.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Local Shape of Pictorial Relief

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How is pictorial relief represented in visual awareness? Certainly not as a “depth map,” but perhaps as a map of local surface attitudes (Koenderink & van Doorn, 1995). Here we consider the possibility that observers might instead, or concurrently, represent local surface shape, a geometrical invariant with respect to motions. Observers judge local surface shape, in a picture of a piece of sculpture, on a five-point categorical scale. Categories are cap–ridge–saddle–rut–cup–flat, where “flat” denotes the absence of shape. We find that observers readily perform such a task, with full resolution of a shape index scale (cap–ridge–saddle–rut–cup), and with excellent self-consistency over days. There exist remarkable inter-observer differences. Over a group of 10 naive observers we find that the dispersion of judgments peaks at the saddle category. There may be a relation of this finding to the history of the topic—Alberti's (1827) omission of the saddle category in his purportedly exhaustive catalog of local surface shapes.

show abstract

“…This paradoxical (Claparède, 1904; Koenderink, van Doorn, & Kappers, 1994) stereoscopic impression had been predicted before (Ames, 1925; Ebbinghaus, 1902) but was never directly and qualitatively compared with stereoscopic picture viewing. Monocular aperture viewing is a single case of a collection of viewing modes that achieve this effect, also known as the plastic effect (Higashiyama & Shimono, 2012; Koenderink, Wijntjes, & van Doorn, 2013). These ways of viewing include the following:

Monocular viewing (even better when using an aperture).

Optically decrease interocular distance (Javals’ iconoscope).

Increase the viewing distance.

Looking through an artificial pupil.

Change accommodation to infinity (using a lens).

Change convergence to parallel.

Introduce blur in one eye.

Looking through a mirror.

Looking through a synopter.

…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ways of Viewing Pictorial Plasticity

Wijntjes

2017

i-Perception

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The plastic effect is historically used to denote various forms of stereopsis. The vivid impression of depth often associated with binocular stereopsis can also be achieved in other ways, for example, using a synopter. Accounts of this go back over a hundred years. These ways of viewing all aim to diminish sensorial evidence that the picture is physically flat. Although various viewing modes have been proposed in the literature, their effects have never been compared. In the current study, we compared three viewing modes: monocular blur, synoptic viewing, and free viewing (using a placebo synopter). By designing a physical embodiment that was indistinguishable for the three experimental conditions, we kept observers naïve with respect to the differences between them; 197 observers participated in an experiment where the three viewing modes were compared by performing a rating task. Results indicate that synoptic viewing causes the largest plastic effect. Monocular blur scores lower than synoptic viewing but is still rated significantly higher than the baseline conditions. The results strengthen the idea that synoptic viewing is not due to a placebo effect. Furthermore, monocular blur has been verified for the first time as a way of experiencing the plastic effect, although the effect is smaller than synoptic viewing. We discuss the results with respect to the theoretical basis for the plastic effect. We show that current theories are not described with sufficient details to explain the differences we found.

show abstract

Zograscopic Viewing

Cited by 23 publications

References 17 publications

On Alternative Approaches to 3D Image Perception: Monoscopic 3D Techniques

On Alternative Approaches to 3D Image Perception: Monoscopic 3D Techniques

Local Shape of Pictorial Relief

Ways of Viewing Pictorial Plasticity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About