Visual information about moving objects.

J T Todd

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 6457104

Visual information about moving objects.

J T Todd

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

A mathematical model of visual flow is presented, which could potentially account for an observer's ability to effectively interact with moving objects. The analysis demonstrates that there is visual information available to an observer about (a) a moving object's angle of approach, (b) changes in its velocity and acceleration, (c) whether its velocity and acceleration are positive or negative, (d) its time to collision with both the horizontal and vertical axes, and (e) whether it will cross the horizontal axis in front of or behind the point of observation. Several experiments are reported in which observer's sensitivity to these different aspects of visual information is examined using a variety of experimental tasks. The results suggest that human observers are highly sensitive to many abstract properties of visual stimulation, but that they are not sensitive to all of the information that is potentially available.

Explore related subjects

Discrimination, Psychological Form Perception Humans Motion Perception Orientation Pattern Recognition, Visual Psychophysics Journal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

J T Todd. 1981. Visual information about moving objects.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6457104/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed1998

Is human motion detection subserved by a single or multiple channel mechanism?

Two recent versions of a single channel model of motion perception have had impressive success in explaining direction discrimination by human observers for spatially filtered noise images in two-flash apparent motion. It has been argued that the dramatic breakdown in motion perception which occurs when one image in the two-flash sequence is low-pass filtered can be explained only by a single channel model. We show that neither version of the single channel model which has been proposed can explain performance for noise images chosen to provide comparable stimulation in the spatial channels known to subserve human vision. A multi-channel model of motion perception has little difficulty in explaining these results.

Discrimination, Psychological↗

PubMed1998

Evidence for boundary-specific grouping.

A prerequisite for higher-level visual tasks such as object recognition is a segmentation of the image into distinct two-dimensional regions. While it has long been assumed that the human visual system jointly exploits region and boundary cues for image segmentation, we report the results of psychophysical experiments which suggest that the visual system relies on geometric properties of bounding contours such as closure and not on the texture of the two-dimensional regions they partition. These findings suggest that the visual system may code and links contours into coherent shapes before surface properties are conjoined.

Discrimination, Psychological↗

PubMed1997

Motion deblurring in human vision.

Under normal viewing conditions we are little conscious of blur in moving objects, despite the persistence of vision. Moving objects look more blurred in brief than in long exposures, suggesting an active mechanism for suppressing motion blur. To see whether blur suppression would improve visual discrimination of objects, we measured blur discrimination thresholds for moving Gaussian-blurred edges and bars. The observer's task was to decide which of two moving stimuli, presented successively, was the more blurred. It is known that for stationary objects the just-noticeable difference in blur increases with baseline blur; therefore, if motion increases blur, it would be expected to increase the just-noticeable difference in blur. An active deblurring mechanism, on the other hand, would be expected to counteract the detrimental effects of motion blur on discrimination performance. We found, however, that motion increased thresholds for blur discrimination, both for brief (40 ms) and for longer (150 ms) exposures. We conclude that motion deblurring is a subjective effect, which does not enhance visual discrimination performance. Moving objects appear sharp, not because of some special mechanism that removes blur, but because the visual system is unable to perform the discrimination necessary to decide whether the moving object is really sharp or not.

Discrimination, Psychological↗