chapter 6: metacontrast and motion perception (pp. 219-233 ) thomas otto

19
Chapter 6: Metacontrast and Motion Perception (pp. 219-233 ) Thomas Otto EDNE 016: Dynamic Vision 23.01.2007

Upload: hagen

Post on 22-Feb-2016

41 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

EDNE 016: Dynamic Vision. 23.01.2007. Chapter 6: Metacontrast and Motion Perception (pp. 219-233 ) Thomas Otto. Visual persistence. A percept persists for some time after the termination of the stimulus. Visual persistence is about 120 ms under daylight. Motion smear. Burr (1980). - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

  • Chapter 6: Metacontrastand Motion Perception (pp. 219-233 )

    Thomas OttoEDNE 016: Dynamic Vision23.01.2007

  • Visual persistenceA percept persists for some time after the termination of the stimulusVisual persistence is about 120 ms under daylight

  • Motion smearBurr (1980)Moving objects should be perceived like in a photograph with a 125 ms shutter speed

  • Suppression of persistenceThe amount of motion smear is far less than may be expected from visual persistenceBurr (1980)

  • Suppression of persistence & metacontrastA moving stimulus fulfills the definitionof a metacontrast mask Suppression of persistence & metacontrast are similar from the perspective of PHENOMENOLOGY

  • PhenomenologySuppression of persistence & metacontrast are similar in: - Dependence on luminance

    - Spatial and temporal separation

    - Eccentricity

  • Motion de-blurring modelsModels of motion de-blurring can be viewed as models of metacontrast

    There are mainly two classesbased on: - motion compensation and fusion

    - lateral inhibition

  • Motion compensationSpatio-temporally oriented receptive fieldsBurr, Ross & Morrone (1986)

  • Lateral inhibitionThe RECOD modelPurushothaman, Ogmen, Chen & Bedell (1998)

  • The RECOD model & an isolated targetPurushothaman, Ogmen, Chen & Bedell (1998)The RECOD model predicts extensive smearfor isolated targets

  • The RECOD model & multiple targetsPurushothaman, Ogmen, Chen & Bedell (1998)The motion smear is basically removed by the transient activity of nearby stimuli

  • Isolated targetAn isolated target appears to be extensively smearedChen, Bedell & Ogmen (1995)

  • Confusing summary paragraphThese findings provide evidence against models where motion plays a causal role in metacontrastBreitmeyer & Ogmen (2006)

  • Isolated targetA velocity of 10 deg/scorresponds to a SOA of about 5 ms given a target-mask separation of 200

  • Confusing summary paragraph Metacontrast can improve the clarity of form perception by suppressing the smear of moving objects

    A careful parametric analysis shows thatmetacontrast and motion involve different mechanisms

    Breitmeyer & Ogmen (2006)

  • SummarySuppression of persistence and metacontrast are similar from the perspective of

    STIMULI and PHENOMENOLOGY

    There might be ONE mechanism responsible for both phenomena!

  • The end Thanks for your attention!

  • Transient and sustained activity

  • Experimental data vs. model prediction