On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 11:15:11 -0500, Warp wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> (demonstrated to me several times when I tossed car keys to him and he
>> could never tell how far away they were).
> 
>   The brain cannot adapt to such a small object making such a rapid
>   movement
> with one eye only. The visual clues are too subtle and too fast.

Yes, that was my point.

>   Instead, put the keys on a table, and then walk from afar towards the
> table with one eye covered, and take the keys. At least I don't have the
> slightest problem in doing that. That's because the brain has time to
> estimate the distance to the keys accurately while you are walking,
> watching the keys.

The wonderful thing about the brain is that there are may different ways 
for them to work.  Some people have an easier time with some things than 
others as a result.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 11:15:11 -0500, Warp wrote:

> > Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> >> (demonstrated to me several times when I tossed car keys to him and he
> >> could never tell how far away they were).
> > 
> >   The brain cannot adapt to such a small object making such a rapid
> >   movement
> > with one eye only. The visual clues are too subtle and too fast.

> Yes, that was my point.

  You seemed to disagree with the claim I made, which you were responding to,
that the lack of depth perception of people blind on one eye has been
greatly exaggerated.

  Depth perception may have been diminished, and the depth of rapid
spontaneous movement may be hard to visualize, but that's far from how
one-eyed vision is depicted in popular culture, which is absolutely
exaggerated. What a one-eyed man sees is more than what a camera sees
because the brain really *adds* depth perception from secondary clues.

  As I have been writing, you can test that for yourself eg. by watching
a computer game or movie, and the effect is quite cool.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 13:15:06 -0500, Warp wrote:

>   You seemed to disagree with the claim I made, which you were
>   responding to,
> that the lack of depth perception of people blind on one eye has been
> greatly exaggerated.

I do think that claim is inaccurate, yes.

>   Depth perception may have been diminished, and the depth of rapid
> spontaneous movement may be hard to visualize, but that's far from how
> one-eyed vision is depicted in popular culture, which is absolutely
> exaggerated. What a one-eyed man sees is more than what a camera sees
> because the brain really *adds* depth perception from secondary clues.
> 
>   As I have been writing, you can test that for yourself eg. by watching
> a computer game or movie, and the effect is quite cool.

I have done so several times myself, but it seems to me that it makes a 
difference whether or not your brain has been trained to make the 
adjustment.  Those who are sighted in both eyes have brains that can 
compensate for diminished capacities in some ways, however those who have 
never had sight in one eye experience the world differently than you or I 
do, so to say that their brains can compensate for this in the same way 
ours can when we just close one eye is, IMHO, inaccurate.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:4b15402a@news.povray.org...
> somebody <x### [at] ycom> wrote:
> > It's not depth perception that's stronger with one eye (which would be
> > absurd).
>
>   Watching a moving 3D scenery which has been projected onto a 2D plane
> (such as a computer game or a movie) with one eye *does* give you a
stronger
> perception of depth than watching it with both eyes. If you don't believe
> it, try it. (Give your brain about a minute to adapt.)
>
>   It's not absurd. The brain is quite good at compensating for lack of
> stereo vision.

I know what you are seeing and don't disagree, but you are using odd
terminology. There's no _depth_ on a flat 2D panel to perceive. What you are
seeing is an illusion, which is made more convincing by _eliminating_ the
real depth perception so that your mind is more suggestible to the presented
one.

Post a reply to this message

On 12/1/2009 11:33 AM, Darren New wrote:
> I am highly amused at the visual effects of Batman getting clubbed with
> a pipe, or how the screen goes all fuzzy while you're choking the crap
> out of someone. :-)

Er... Can you show me an example of a video game that doesn't use a 
pinhole-type camera?

--
Michael Horvath
mik### [at] gmailcom
http://isometricland.com

Post a reply to this message

SharkD wrote:
> Er... Can you show me an example of a video game that doesn't use a 
> pinhole-type camera?

Anything with lens flair. The new Batman game I referred to.  I'm not sure I 
can *show* you an example, but I can name you examples.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
   much longer being almost empty than almost full.

Post a reply to this message

SharkD wrote:
> Er... Can you show me an example of a video game that doesn't use a 
> pinhole-type camera?

Hmmm. Serious Sam seems to count.
http://www.giantbomb.com/lens-flare/92-763/all-images/52-302921/961109_20090715_790screen003/51-1081760/

Batman's focal blur:

http://screenshots.teamxbox.com/screen/90600/Batman-Arkham-Asylum/

Altho that wasn't the effect I was talking about, and it's possible that's 
supposed to just be rain/fog, especially since it only seems to be happening 
outside.

Ah, that's definitely focal blur.

http://xbox360.ign.com/dor/objects/14273491/batman-arkham-asylum/images/batman-arkham-asylum-20090805051330391.html?page=mediaFull

http://xbox360.ign.com/dor/objects/14273491/batman-arkham-asylum/images/batman-arkham-asylum-20090805051405078.html?page=mediaFull



And an example of the blur I was talking about when you're choking the crap 
out of someone:
http://xbox360.ign.com/dor/objects/14273491/batman-arkham-asylum/images/batman-arkham-asylum-20090805051402359.html?page=mediaFull
Check out, for example, how een his ears are blurry.


-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
   much longer being almost empty than almost full.

Post a reply to this message

> Er... Can you show me an example of a video game that doesn't use a 
> pinhole-type camera?

I thought most recent games used some form of DoF?

I've been playing GT5 for ages and this have nice DoF effects:

http://mos.futurenet.com/resources/gamesradar/PS3_wallpaper/GT5_1_1080p.jpg

Post a reply to this message

somebody <x### [at] ycom> wrote:
> I know what you are seeing and don't disagree, but you are using odd
> terminology. There's no _depth_ on a flat 2D panel to perceive. What you are
> seeing is an illusion

  "Perception" means what the brain perceives, and if it perceives depth
(where there is none), that's depth perception.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

SharkD wrote:
> Er... Can you show me an example of a video game that doesn't use a 
> pinhole-type camera?

Actually, come to think of it, I am not sure why having stuff like lens 
flair in a video game makes it more "realistic" unless the character in the 
game is looking through a lens, which is usually not the case.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
   much longer being almost empty than almost full.

Post a reply to this message