Mirror-reflecting a picture of an object: What happens to the shape percept?

Perception and Psychophysics

Volumn 65, Issue 7, 2003, Pages 1110-1125

  Cornelis, Els V K ^a   Van Doorn, Andrea J ^a   De Ridder, Huib ^a  

^a DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0348221959     PISSN: 00315117     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03194838     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. BELHUMEUR, P. N., KRIEGMAN, D. J., & YUILLE, A. L. (1999). The basrelief ambiguity. International Journal of Computer Vision, 35, 33-44.
2. BIEDERMAN, I. (1987). Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding. Psychological Review, 94, 115-147.
3. EDWARDS, B. (1979). Drawing on the right side of the brain: A course in enhancing creativity and artistic confidence. Los Angeles: Tarcher.
4. GIBSON, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
5. HILDEBRAND, A. (1918). Dos Problem der Form in der bildenden Kunst (3rd ed.) [The problem of form in painting and sculpture]. Strassburg: Heitz.
6. KOENDERINK, J. J., KAPPERS, A. M. L., POLLICK, F. E., & KAWATO, M. (1997). Correspondence in pictorial space. Perception & Psychophysics, 59, 813-827.
7. KOENDERINK, J. J., VAN DOORN, A. J. (2003). Pictorial space. In H. Hecht, R. Schwartz, & M. Atherton (Eds.), Looking into pictures: An interdisciplinary approach to pictorial space (pp. 239-403). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8. KOENDERINK, J. J., VAN DOORN, A. J., AREND, L., & HECHT, H. (2002). Ecological optics and the creative eye. In D. Heyer & R. Mausfeld (Eds.), Perception and the physical world: Psychological and philosophical issues in perception (pp. 271-304). New York: Wiley.
9. KOENDERINK, J. J., VAN DOORN, A. J., CHRISTOU, C., & LAPPIN, J. S. (1996a). Perturbation study of shading in pictures. Perception, 25, 1009-1026.
10. KOENDERINK, J. J., VAN DOORN, A. J., CHRISTOU, C., & LAPPIN, J. S. (1996b). Shape constancy in pictorial relief. Perception, 25, 155-164.
11. KOENDERINK, J. J., VAN DOORN, A. J., & KAPPERS, A. M. L. (1992). Surface perception in pictures. Perception & Psychophysics, 52, 487-496.
12. KOENDERINK, J. J., VAN DOORN, A. J., & KAPPERS, A. M. L. (1994). On so-called paradoxical monocular stereoscopy. Perception, 23, 583-594.
13. KOENDERINK, J. J., VAN DOORN, A. J., & KAPPERS, A. M. L. (1995). Depth relief. Perception, 24, 115-126.
14. KOENDERINK, J. J., VAN DOORN, A. J., KAPPERS, A. M. L., & TODD, J. T. (2000). Directing the mental eye in pictorial perception. In B. E. Rogowitz & T. N. Pappas (Eds.), Proceedings of SPIE: Vol. 3959. Human Vision and Electronic Imaging V(pp. 2-13). Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optical Engineering.
15. KOENDERINK, J. J., VAN DOORN, A. J., KAPPERS, A. M. L., & TODD, J. T. (2001). Ambiguity and the "mental eye" in pictorial relief. Perception, 30, 431-448.
16. LANGER, M. S., & BÜLTHOFF, H. H. (2000). Measuring visual shape using computer graphics psychophysics. In B. Péroche & H. Rushmeier (Eds.), Rendering Techniques 2000: Proceedings of the Eurographics Workshop on Rendering Techniques (pp. 1-9). Vienna: Springer-Verlag.
17. MARR, D., & NISHIHARA, H. K. (1978). Representation and recognition of the spatial organization of three-dimensional shapes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: Series B, 200, 269-294.
18. PALMER, S. E., ROSCH, E., & CHASE, P. (1981). Canonical perspective and the perception of objects. In J. Long & A. Baddeley (Eds.), Attention and performance IX (pp. 135-151). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
19. PIRENNE, M. H. (1970). Optics, painting and photography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20. ROCK, I., & DIVITA, J. (1987). A case of viewer-centered object perception. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 280-293.
21. ROCK, I., DIVITA, J., & BARBEITO, R. (1981). The effect on form perception of change of orientation in the third dimension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 7, 719-732.
22. SHEPARD, R. N., & COOPER, L. A. (1982). Mental images and their transformations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23. STEWART, I., & GOLUBITSKY, M. (1993). Fearful symmetry: Is God a geometer? London: Penguin.
24. TARR, M. J. (1995). Rotating objects to recognize them: A case study on the role of viewpoint dependency in the recognition of three-dimensional objects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 55-82.
25. TARR, M. J., BÜLTHOFF, H. H., ZABINSKI, M., & BLANZ, V. (1997). To what extent do unique parts influence recognition across changes in viewpoint? Psychological Science, 8, 282-289.
26. THOULESS, R. H. (1931). Phenomenal regression to the real object. British Journal of Psychology, 21, 339-359.
27. TODD, J. T., KOENDERINK, J. J., VAN DOORN, A. J., & KAPPERS, A. M. L. (1996). Effects of changing viewing conditions on the perceived structure of smoothly curved surfaces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 22, 695-706.
28. VAN DOORN, A. J. (2000). Shape perception in different settings. In B. E. Rogowitz & T. N. Pappas (Eds.), Proceedings of SPIE: Vol. 3959. Human Vision and Electronic Imaging V (pp. 697-708). Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optical Engineering.
29. VANRIE, J., WILLEMS, B., & WAGEMANS, J. (2001). Multiple routes to object matching from different viewpoints: Mental rotation versus in-variant features. Perception, 30, 1047-1056.
30. WAGEMANS, J., VAN GOOL, L., LAMOTE, C., & FOSTER, D. H. (2000). Minimal information to determine affine shape equivalence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 26, 443-468.