A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » 35mm Photo Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Depth perception and contrasting colours



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old August 29th 09, 11:55 AM posted to aus.photo,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Calvin Sambrook
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 82
Default Depth perception and contrasting colours

"Jeff R." wrote in message
...
Jeff R. wrote:
Calvin Sambrook wrote:
it's more obvious when the contrasting colours are large and touching
or one on top of the other, try pink(magenta) on blue.


This what you meant?
http://www.mendosus.com/photography/colour-stereo.html (updated with new
image) http://www.mendosus.com/photography/six-colour.gif

--
Jeff R.


That's the one.

  #12  
Old August 29th 09, 12:11 PM posted to aus.photo,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Calvin Sambrook
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 82
Default Depth perception and contrasting colours

"Jeff R." wrote in message
...
Calvin Sambrook wrote:
"Jeff R." wrote in message
Like so:
http://www.mendosus.com/photography/colour-stereo.html

Can everyone here see the apparent differences in depth of the
coloured text on that page?
Can anyone resolutely *not* see it?


I'd be very surprised if anyone genuinely couldn't see it as I
understand it to be the result of fundamental physics and physiology
rather than an optical trick as much 3d stuff uses.


"Optical trick" is a bit harsh, I think. All the techniques I am aware of
serve simply to present a slightly different image to each eye - each
image offset by (ideally) the spacing of one's eyes.

Contrasting colours on a black background provide a very real stereo
illusion, but I can't for the life of me see how it could be presenting
different (offset) images to each eye.


Yes, I was a bit harsh really they are all tricks in a sense. I didn't mean
to belittle one or the other.
By "trick" I kind of mean something which exploits the physiology in order
to simulate an effect. So presenting two silghtly different 2d images to
the eyes in a controlled way in order to make the brain think it's viewing a
3d scene is a trick in that sense, just like presenting a sequence of
different images in order to trick the eye into thinking it's seeing motion
is a trick.


... That said the
website you've given isn't a particularly good one to show it up,


Really?
Is the illusion obvious to you in the first few (red/blue) line groups?


it's more obvious when the contrasting colours are large and touching
or one on top of the other, try pink(magenta) on blue.


Not sure I follow what you mean by "large", but I'll give it a go. Stay
tuned for updates.


Opps, sorry, I didn't realise that was your work or I would have worded it a
little less bluntly, I thought you had found that site.



Does it work with one eye closed?
(It doesn't for me.)


It certainly should as the effect is within the eye rather than
between eyes IYSWIM.


Yes, I follow, but my experience is that the effect *almost completely*
disappears when I close one eye. I think I'm kidding myself, but I fancy
there is only a tiny, marginal effect when viewed monocular, but there is
certainly a huge, easy-to-see effect when viewed binocular.



More interestingly, can anyone offer a simple, understandable
explanation for the effect?


From (slightly hazy) memory it's caused by chromatic abberation, or
differential focus, or differential magnification, or differential
colour (pick a term, I've seen all of them used), of the colours by
the simply lens of your eye. Photoraphers see this sort of thing a
lot in lenses, particularly long ones.


Y-e-e-e-es... (trying to figure out how CA would cause a stereo
illusion...)

Do you mean:
The different colours achieve focus at different points (even though the
source is coplanar), so the brain interprets that difference as a
difference in depth?
That makes sense, though it seems contrary to the evidence.
Would I be aware (consciously) of the differential focus? (Would I be able
to sense my eyes trying to focus differently?)
Would/(should?) all the colours appear to be in sharp focus
simultaneously? (as they demonstrably are)
Would this effect work monocularly? (I say it doesn't)


Your eyes do lots of things you're not aware of. I suspect this effect also
gets caught up in the stocastic (sp?) movement issue too - do you notice
that the magenta and red on blue appear to "dance" or "swim" a little on the
page? Try a big blob of say red on a blue field which covers the whole
screen.


Nice idea.
I'm sure it's (at least) the germ of the answer. (different wavelengths
being interpreted differently)

Your eye/brain is not a simple camera and doesn't just record what it
sees like a camera but rather interprets it to glean information. It's
(incorrectly) interpreting the chromatic abberation and hence
different focal points for the colours as distance information.

(sorry - I repeated what you said)

Googling produces some joy, but not much. (Too tight to pay for
research papers.)

Anyone think there could be implications here for landscape
photography? (Or is the effect too gross/unsubtle?)


Well, it only really happens with fully saturated colours (if you
think about the explanation you;ll see why)


One of the sources I looked at cited a Van Gogh landscape
http://astro1.panet.utoledo.edu/~lsa.../19_wheatS.jpg
in which the pastel-blue sky/clouds appear to stand out behind the
pastel-green fore and mid-ground.
(from http://astro1.panet.utoledo.edu/~lsa...r/19_depth.htm - good
stuff)

I don't know if the effect there is down to colour and depth perception,
or Van Gogh's genius, but either way I do see it... and the colours are
pastel, not saturated.

....which is why it's common
with in additive colour systems (things which emit light like
monitors) and not often seen in subtractive colour systems (paints,
books and printed photos) although there was a superb album cover in
the late 1970's or early 1980's which demonstrated it really well
with a word written in pink on a blue background - I wish I could
remember what it was called.


Likewise I recall a story book from my youth that featured bright red and
blue text on a black background - I found the 3D effect disturbing, even
as a young'un. Had to run my fingers over the book to be sure it was
actually flat. (it was)


So if you're in the habit of taking photos of fully saturated pink
mountains against saturated blue skies look out!


Not too many of those round here, so no risk.


Cheers,
Calvin


Thanks for your input.

--
Jeff R.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
HDR - how to get the photmatix colours? bugbear Digital Photography 5 June 25th 09 04:18 AM
Count 'em 1 M colours Alan Browne Digital SLR Cameras 3 May 14th 09 08:04 AM
printer colours vs 'real' colours dido22 Digital Photography 4 June 15th 07 04:37 PM
Visual perception and gamma encoding Johannes Digital Photography 3 October 8th 06 04:59 PM
B&W portrait w/contrasting skin tones Ry8n Photographing People 2 March 9th 04 08:10 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.