Large Continuous Perspective Change With Noncoplanar Points Enables Accurate Slant Perception

Perceived slant has often been characterized as a component of 3D shape perception for polyhedral objects. Like 3D shape, slant is often perceived inaccurately. Lind, Lee, Mazanowski, Kountouriotis, and Bingham (2014) found that 3D shape was perceived accurately with perspective changes ≥45°. We now similarly tested perception of 3D slant. To account for their results, Lind et al. (2014) developed a bootstrap model based on the assumption that optical information yields perception of 3D relief structure then used with large perspective changes to bootstrap to perception of 3D Euclidean structure. However, slant perception usually entails planar surfaces and structure-from-motion fails in the absence of noncoplanar points. Nevertheless, the displays in Lind et al. (2014) included stereomotion in addition to monocular optical flow. Because stereomotion is higher order, the bootstrap model might apply in the case of strictly planar surfaces. We investigated whether stereomotion, monocular structure-from-motion (SFM), or the combination of the two would yield accurate 3D slant perception with large continuous perspective change. In Experiment 1, we found that judgments of slant were inaccurate in all information conditions. In Experiment 2, we added noncoplanar structure to the surfaces. We found that judgments in the monocular SFM and combined conditions now became correct once perspective changes were ≥45°, replicating the results of Lind et al. (2014) and supporting the bootstrap model. In short, we found that noncoplanar structure was required to enable accurate perception of 3D slant with sufficiently large perspective changes.

[1]  Hirohisa Yaguchi,et al.  Motion in depth based on inter-ocular velocity differences , 2000, Vision Research.

[2]  Mark Wagner,et al.  Comparing the psychophysical and geometric characteristics of spatial perception and cognitive maps (特集:空間の知覚と認知のモデル) , 2008 .

[3]  M Lind Perceiving motion and rigid structure from optic flow: A combined weak-perspective and polar-perspective approach , 1996, Perception & psychophysics.

[4]  J T Todd,et al.  The visual perception of surface orientation from optical motion , 1999, Perception & psychophysics.

[5]  James T Todd,et al.  The visual perception of 3-D shape from multiple cues: Are observers capable of perceiving metric structure? , 2003, Perception & psychophysics.

[6]  J. Todd,et al.  Systematic distortion of perceived three-dimensional structure from motion and binocular stereopsis. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[7]  Kent A. Stevens,et al.  Slant-tilt: The visual encoding of surface orientation , 1983, Biological Cybernetics.

[8]  J. Saunders,et al.  Do humans optimally integrate stereo and texture information for judgments of surface slant? , 2003, Vision Research.

[9]  J T Todd,et al.  The perception of 3-dimensional affine structure from minimal apparent motion sequences , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

[10]  H. A. Sedgwick,et al.  Environment-centered and viewer-centered perception of surface orientation , 1986 .

[11]  J. Todd,et al.  The perception of surface curvature from optical motion , 1998, Perception & psychophysics.

[12]  Rich Gossweiler,et al.  Perceiving geographical slant , 1995, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[13]  E. Johnston Systematic distortions of shape from stereopsis , 1991, Vision Research.

[14]  H. Bülthoff,et al.  3D shape perception from combined depth cues in human visual cortex , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[15]  Mats Lind,et al.  Large continuous perspective transformations are necessary and sufficient for accurate perception of metric shape , 2008, Perception & psychophysics.

[16]  O. Reiser,et al.  Principles Of Gestalt Psychology , 1936 .

[17]  Donald D. Hoffman,et al.  Parts of recognition , 1984, Cognition.

[18]  Geoffrey P. Bingham,et al.  Large perspective changes yield perception of metric shape that allows accurate feedforward reaches-to-grasp and it persists after the optic flow has stopped! , 2010, Experimental Brain Research.

[19]  James T Todd,et al.  Are discrimination thresholds a valid measure of variance for judgments of slant from texture? , 2010, Journal of vision.

[20]  Jan J. Koenderink,et al.  On the Affine Structure of Perceptual Space , 2001, Psychological science.

[21]  J T Todd,et al.  Distortions of Three-Dimensional Space in the Perceptual Analysis of Motion and Stereo , 1995, Perception.

[22]  Mats Lind,et al.  Affine operations plus symmetry yield perception of metric shape with large perspective changes (≥45°): data and model. , 2014, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[24]  J. Gibson,et al.  The perceived slant of visual surfaces-optical and geographical. , 1952, Journal of experimental psychology.

[25]  Andrew Zisserman,et al.  3D Motion recovery via affine Epipolar geometry , 1995, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[26]  B. G. Cumming,et al.  Binocular mechanisms for detecting motion-in-depth , 1994, Vision Research.

[27]  Mats Lind,et al.  Object recognition using metric shape , 2012, Vision Research.

[28]  J. Gibson,et al.  The relation of apparent shape to apparent slant in the perception of objects. , 1955, Journal of experimental psychology.

[29]  Mats Lind,et al.  Perceived 3D metric (or Euclidean) shape is merely ambiguous, not systematically distorted , 2012, Experimental Brain Research.

[30]  C Shawn Green,et al.  Optimal Combination of the Binocular Cues to 3D Motion. , 2015, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[31]  Heiko Hecht,et al.  Theories of time-to-contact , 2004 .

[32]  H. Flock SOME CONDITIONS SUFFICIENT FOR ACCURATE MONOCULAR PERCEPTIONS OF MOVING SURFACE SLANTS. , 1964, Journal of experimental psychology.

[33]  H. Sakata,et al.  Toward an understanding of the neural processing for 3D shape perception , 2005, Neuropsychologia.

[34]  H WALLACH,et al.  The role of slant in the perception of shape. , 1962, The American journal of psychology.

[35]  Julie M. Harris,et al.  Two Independent Mechanisms for Motion-In-Depth Perception: Evidence from Individual Differences , 2010, Front. Psychology.

[36]  James M. Hillis,et al.  Slant from texture and disparity cues: optimal cue combination. , 2004, Journal of vision.

[37]  J J Koenderink,et al.  Affine structure from motion. , 1991, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[38]  P. Kaiser,et al.  Perceived shape and its dependency on perceived slant. , 1967, Journal of experimental psychology.

[39]  M. Wagner,et al.  The geometries of visual space , 2006 .

[40]  S. Moreau,et al.  What Is Discrimination , 2010 .