Literature DB >> 8711905

The effect of display size on disparity scaling from differential perspective and vergence cues.

M F Bradshaw1, A Glennerster, B J Rogers.   

Abstract

The present study compared the relative effectiveness of differential perspective and vergence angle manipulations in scaling depth from horizontal disparities. When differential perspective and vergence angle were manipulated together (to simulate a range of different viewing distances from 28 cm to infinity), approximately 35% of the scaling required for complete depth constancy was obtained. When manipulated separately the relative influence of each cue depended crucially on the size of the visual display. Differential perspective was only effective when the display size was sufficiently large (i.e., greater than 20 deg) whereas the influence of vergence angle, although evident at each display size, was greatest in the smaller displays. For each display size the independent effects of the two cues were approximately additive. Perceived size (and two-dimensional spacing of elements) was also affected by manipulations of differential perspective and vergence. These results confirm that both differential perspective and vergence are effective in scaling the perceived two-dimensional size of elements and the perceived depth from horizontal disparities. They also show that the effect of the two cues in combination is approximately equal to the sum of their individual effects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8711905     DOI: 10.1016/0042-6989(95)00190-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vision Res        ISSN: 0042-6989            Impact factor:   1.886


  14 in total

1.  Do visual cues contribute to the neural estimate of viewing distance used by the oculomotor system?

Authors:  Min Wei; Gregory C DeAngelis; Dora E Angelaki
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2003-09-10       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Focus cues affect perceived depth.

Authors:  Simon J Watt; Kurt Akeley; Marc O Ernst; Martin S Banks
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2005-12-15       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  Stereoscopy and the Human Visual System.

Authors:  Martin S Banks; Jenny C A Read; Robert S Allison; Simon J Watt
Journal:  SMPTE Motion Imaging J       Date:  2012-05

4.  Effect of vertical disparities on depth representation in macaque monkeys: MT physiology and behavior.

Authors:  Syed A Chowdhury; Daniel L Christiansen; Michael L Morgan; Gregory C DeAngelis
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2007-12-12       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Relationship between threshold and suprathreshold perception of position and stereoscopic depth.

Authors:  Saumil S Patel; Harold E Bedell; Dorcas K Tsang; Michael T Ukwade
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 2.129

6.  The role of binocular vision in walking.

Authors:  Mary Hayhoe; Barbara Gillam; Kelly Chajka; Elia Vecellio
Journal:  Vis Neurosci       Date:  2009-01-20       Impact factor: 3.241

7.  Visual discomfort and depth-of-field.

Authors:  Louise O'Hare; Tingting Zhang; Harold T Nefs; Paul B Hibbard
Journal:  Iperception       Date:  2013-05-16

8.  Modeling depth from motion parallax with the motion/pursuit ratio.

Authors:  Mark Nawrot; Michael Ratzlaff; Zachary Leonard; Keith Stroyan
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-10-06

9.  Failures of stereoscopic shape constancy over changes of viewing distance and size for bilaterally symmetric polyhedra.

Authors:  Ying Yu; James T Todd; Alexander A Petrov
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2021-06-07       Impact factor: 2.240

10.  Why do animal eyes have pupils of different shapes?

Authors:  Martin S Banks; William W Sprague; Jürgen Schmoll; Jared A Q Parnell; Gordon D Love
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2015-08-07       Impact factor: 14.136

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.