Surface tilt (the direction of slant): A neglected psychophysical variable

Surface slant (the angle between the line of sight and the surface normal) is an important psychophysical variable. However, slant angle captures only one of the two degrees of freedom of surface orientation, the other being thedirection of slant. Slant direction, measured in the image plane, coincides with the direction of the gradient of distance from viewer to surface and, equivalently, with the direction the surface normal would point if projected onto the image plane. Since slant direction may be quantified by the tilt of the projected normal (which ranges over 360 deg in the frontal plane), it is referred to here assurface tilt. (Note that slant angle is measured perpendicular to the image plane, whereas tilt angle is measured in the image plane.) Compared with slant angle’s popularity as a psychophysical variable, the attention paid to surface tilt seems undeservedly scant. Experiments that demonstrate a technique for measuring apparent surface tilt are reported. The experimental stimuli were oblique crosses and parallelograms, which suggest oriented planes in 3-D. The apparent tilt of the plane might be probed by orienting a needle in 3-D so as to appear normal, projecting the normal onto the image plane, and measuring its direction (e.g., relative to the horizontal). It is shown to be preferable, however, to merely rotate a line segment in 2-D, superimposed on the display, until it appears normal to the perceived surface. The apparent surface tilt recorded in these experiments corresponded closely to that predicted by assuming the 3-D configurations consist of equal-length lines and perpendicular intersections.

[1]  J. Gibson The perception of visual surfaces. , 1950, The American journal of psychology.

[2]  H. Flock,et al.  Variables of Surface Texture and Accuracy of Space Perceptions , 1964, Perceptual and motor skills.

[3]  H R FLOCK,et al.  A POSSIBLE OPTICAL BASIS FOR MONOCULAR SLANT PERCEPTION. , 1964, Psychological review.

[4]  H. Flock Optical texture and linear perspective as stimuli for slant perception. , 1965, Psychological review.

[5]  R. B. Freeman Effect of size on visual slant. , 1966, Journal of experimental psychology.

[6]  A. L. Kraft,et al.  The effect of pattern and texture gradient on slant and shape judgments , 1967 .

[7]  F. Attneave,et al.  The determination of perceived tridimensional orientation by minimum criteria , 1969 .

[8]  J. Payne,et al.  Perspective and form ratio as determinants of relative slant judgments , 1969 .

[9]  D. Perkins Visual discrimination between rectangular and nonrectangular parallelopipeds , 1972 .

[10]  J. O. Robinson The Psychology of Visual Illusion , 1972 .

[11]  R. Olson Slant judgments from static and rotating trapezoids correspond to rules of perspective geometry , 1974 .

[12]  Berthold K. P. Horn Obtaining shape from shading information , 1989 .

[13]  Jan J. Koenderink,et al.  Local structure of movement parallax of the plane , 1976 .

[14]  Andrew P. Witkin,et al.  Recovering Surface Shape and Orientation from Texture , 1981, Artif. Intell..

[15]  Kent A. Stevens,et al.  The Visual Interpretation of Surface Contours , 1981, Artif. Intell..

[16]  Donald D. Hoffman Inferring local surface orientation from motion fields. , 1982, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[17]  H. Barlow Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information: David Marr. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1982. pp. xvi + 397 , 1983 .