monocular depth-perception: details emerging

[rinselberg]

Is "monocular depth-perception" an oxymoron?

Not according to researchers at the University of Rochester..


Select ("click") any of the icons to explore another aspect of RinselWorld™

... ... ... ...

[rbaker]

Is "monocular depth-perception" an oxymoron?

Not according to researchers at the University of Rochester..


Select ("click") any of the icons to explore another aspect of RinselWorld™

... ... ... ...

I recall pulling some strings to position two blocks of wood at the same distance on a track about ten feet long when I first took my qualifying physical to enter Naval flight training at Cecil Field in the early sixties. This was the dreaded depth perception test and I believe that it was the principal reason in cadet flight physical failure. Sometime later when I continued flying in my civilian life I began to encounter private pilots who claimed to have no depth perception and in fact met a few who had had an eye enucleated. Hmmm . . . Apparently binocular vision is not required to safely fly an aircraft. The FAA uses a demonstrated performance criteria in the issuance of airmen medical certificates. Broadly speaking they allow for a flight test which will allow the examinee to demonstrate that his disability does not effect his flight performance. The military does have higher standards but I think the main reason for these strict standards is to reduce the number of applicants.

In the case of depth perception it has long been known that our brain can process depth or distance from an object by its size (such as another aircraft) or texture (such as grass or asphalt.) I suppose that a scientific explanation will be of some academic interest but from the practical point we have known this all along.

[xiaowei]

<Rant on>

It can be pretty annoying, how almost self-evident results can make big news if they come from any kind of research institute....:hammer:

<Rant off>

That the brain can and will derive depth info from size, relative movement and occlusion of objects is pretty evident and know for a long time. Especially (unvoluntary) small movements of the head and/or body can be very helpful. In fact, german TV many years ago experimented with a monocular 3D system that was based an a camera constantly swing "back and forth" (i.e. left and right) by a slight amount at a few cycles/s.

(This is NOT to be confused with the "Pullfrich type" 3D system that needs a linear motion of the camera and different grey glasses in front of both eyes, and which - IN FACT - IS a binocular system)

Even if many people were annoyed by the wobbling, the effect without any special glasses was/is very impressive, as soon as the wobbling starts, the whole scene gains depth. IIRC they showed part of a soccer game with this technique, very impressive, I wish a had a recording of these old transmissions. Unfortunatelly, research along this was not continued:(, they were still trying to optimize the amount and frequency of the wobble and likely the best blending of the images. (This was before fast PCs were readily available to do this).

In fact, if you have a regular binocular pair of 3D images you can simulate this effect in a viewer on your PC.

ADDED; Also the ultra-wideangle movie system "Cinerama" was partly based on those ideas "His (Fred Waller) work at the Paramount studios in the 1930s led him to the understanding that a sense of depth and realism could be achieved by a wide curved screen that included the viewer's peripheral vision"

http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/wingcr1.htm

Sorry, but no cigar!?

[rinselberg]

Some interesting responses have been posted here.

For the record: The news was that researchers say that for the first time they have identified a specific region in the brain where neurons "compute" motion parallax by combining input from only one of the retinas and the motion of the head and of the same (corresponding) eyeball, in order to achieve that previously well-known monocular sense of depth perception that the other posters here have been describing.

So it's a step forward in the unraveling of exactly how our brain goes about processing the information about the light that impinges on our retinas.

The research may have some medical uses and may also contribute to the science and engineering of virtual reality interfaces for computers.

From..
http://www.physorg.com/news124897069.html