Literature DB >> 9797998

Why the visual recognition system might encode the effects of illumination.

M J Tarr1, D Kersten, H H Bülthoff.   

Abstract

A key problem in recognition is that the image of an object depends on the lighting conditions. We investigated whether recognition is sensitive to illumination using 3-D objects that were lit from either the left or right, varying both the shading and the cast shadows. In experiments 1 and 2 participants judged whether two sequentially presented objects were the same regardless of illumination. Experiment 1 used six objects that were easily discriminated and that were rendered with cast shadows. While no cost was found in sensitivity, there was a response time cost over a change in lighting direction. Experiment 2 included six additional objects that were similar to the original six objects making recognition more difficult. The objects were rendered with cast shadows, no shadows, and as a control, white shadows. With normal shadows a change in lighting direction produced costs in both sensitivity and response times. With white shadows there was a much larger cost in sensitivity and a comparable cost in response times. Without cast shadows there was no cost in either measure, but the overall performance was poorer. Experiment 3 used a naming task in which names were assigned to six objects rendered with cast shadows. Participants practised identifying the objects in two viewpoints lit from a single lighting direction. Viewpoint and illumination invariance were then tested over new viewpoints and illuminations. Costs in both sensitivity and response time were found for naming the familiar objects in unfamiliar lighting directions regardless of whether the viewpoint was familiar or unfamiliar. Together these results suggest that illumination effects such as shadow edges: (1) affect visual memory; (2) serve the function of making unambigous the three-dimensional shape; and (3) are modeled with respect to object shape, rather than simply encoded in terms of their effects in the image.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9797998     DOI: 10.1016/s0042-6989(98)00041-8

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


  7 in total

1.  Contrasting the edge- and surface-based theories of object recognition: behavioral evidence from macaques (Macaca mulatta).

Authors:  Carole Parron; David Washburn
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  2010-01

2.  Change blindness for cast shadows in natural scenes: Even informative shadow changes are missed.

Authors:  Krista A Ehinger; Kala Allen; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 2.199

3.  Shadows remain segmented as selectable regions in object-based attention paradigms.

Authors:  Lee de-Wit; David Milner; Robert Kentridge
Journal:  Iperception       Date:  2012-03-05

4.  About Face: Matching Unfamiliar Faces Across Rotations of View and Lighting.

Authors:  Simone Favelle; Harold Hill; Peter Claes
Journal:  Iperception       Date:  2017-11-29

5.  Can people detect errors in shadows and reflections?

Authors:  Sophie J Nightingale; Kimberley A Wade; Hany Farid; Derrick G Watson
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  Incongruence in Lighting Impairs Face Identification.

Authors:  Denise Y Lim; Alan L F Lee; Charles C-F Or
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-02-28

7.  Coding of shape from shading in area V4 of the macaque monkey.

Authors:  Fabrice Arcizet; Christophe Jouffrais; Pascal Girard
Journal:  BMC Neurosci       Date:  2009-11-30       Impact factor: 3.288

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.