Phenomenally strong visual illusions are described in which the motion of an object‘s cast shadow determines the perceived 3-D trajectory of the object. Simply adjusting the motion of a shadow is sufficient to induce dramatically different apparent trajectories of the object casting the shadow. Psychophysical results obtained with the use of 3-D graphics are reported which show that: (i) the information provided by the motion of an object's shadow overrides other strong sources of information and perceptual biases, such as the assumption of constant object size and a general viewpoint; (ii) the natural constraint of shadow darkness plays a role in the interpretation of a moving image patch as a shadow, but under some conditions even unnatural light shadows can induce apparent motion in depth of an object; (iii) when shadow motion is caused by a moving light source, the visual system incorrectly interprets the shadow motion as consistent with a moving object, rather than a moving light source. The results support the hypothesis that the human visual system incorporates a stationary light-source constraint in the perceptual processing of spatial layout of scenes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArnheimR, 1954Art and Visual Perception (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press)
2.
BülthoffIKerstenDBülthoffH H, 1994“General lighting can overcome accidental viewing”Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science351741 (Abstract)
3.
CavanaghP, 1995“A horse of a different color: Shadows have to be darker but shading does not”Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science36S184 (Abstract)
4.
CavanaghPLeclercY G, 1989“Shape from shadows”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance153–27
5.
CuttingJ EVishtonP M, 1995“Perceiving layout and knowing distances: The integration, relative potency, and contextual use of different information about depth”Perception of Space and Motion Eds EpsteinWRogersS (San Diego, CA: Academic Press) pp 69–117
6.
DosherB ASperlingGWurstS, 1986“Trade-offs between stereopsis and proximity luminance covariance as determinants of perceived 3D structure”Vision Research26973–990
7.
Funka-LeaG D, 1995“The visual recognition of shadows by an active observer”Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania, report MS-CIS-95–11, GRASP LAB 389 (http://www.cis.upenn.edu/∼grasp/technical-reports)
8.
GibsonJ J, 1950The Perception of the Visual World (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin)
9.
GregoryR L, 1970The Intelligent Eye (New York: McGraw-Hill Paperbacks)
10.
JepsonARichardsWKnillD, 1996“Modal structure and reliable inference”, in Perception as Bayesian Inference Eds KnillD CRichardsW (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press) pp 63–92
11.
KenderJ RSmithE M, 1987“Shape from darkness; deriving surface information from dynamic shadows” in Proceedings of the First International Conference on Computer Vision, London, UK (Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press) pp 539–546
12.
KerstenD, 1990“Statistical limits to image understanding”, in Coding and Efficiency Ed. BlakemoreC (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press)
13.
KerstenDKnillD CMamassianPBülthoffI, 1996“Illusory motion from shadows”Nature (London)37931
KnillD CKerstenD, 1991b“Ideal perceptual observers for computation, psychophysics, and neural networks”, in Pattern Recognition by Man and Machine Ed. WattR J, volume 14 of Vision and Visual Disfunction Ed. Cronley-DillonJ R (London: Macmillan) pp 83–97
17.
KnillD CKerstenDMamassianP, 1996a“Implications of a Bayesian formulation”, in Perception as Bayesian Inference Eds KnillD CRichardsW (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press)
18.
KnillD CKerstenDYuilleA, 1996b“Introduction: A Bayesian formulation of visual perception”, in Perception as Bayesian Inference Eds KnillD CRichardsW (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press) chapter 0, pp 1–21
19.
KnillD CMamassianPKerstenD, 1993“The geometry of shadows”University of Minnesota, Computer and Information Sciences Technical Report TR 93–47
20.
LoweD G, 1985Perceptual Organization and Visual Recognition (Boston, MA: Kluwer)
21.
MamassianPKerstenD JKnillD C, 1992a“Spatial layout from cast shadows”Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science331332 (Abstract)
22.
MamassianPKnillD CKerstenD J, 1992b“Interaction of cast shadow and change of size”Perception21Supplement 2, 48 (Abstract)
23.
MetelliF, 1975“Shadows without penumbra”, in Gestaltentheorie in der modernen Psychologie Eds ErtelSKemmlerLStadlerL (Darmstadt: Dietrich Steinkopff) pp 200–209
24.
MooreCCavanaghP (submitted) “Recovery of 3D volume from 2-tone images of novel objects”Cognition
25.
NakayamaKShimojoS, 1992“Experiencing and perceiving visual surfaces”Science2571357–1363
26.
RamachandranV S, 1988“Perception of shape from shading”Nature (London)331163–166
27.
RensinkRCavanaghP, 1993“Processing of shadows at preattentive levels”Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science341288 (Abstract)
28.
RichardsWJepsonAFeldmanJ, 1996“Priors, preferences and categorical percepts”Perception as Bayesian Inference Eds KnillD CRichardsW (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press)
29.
RichardsWJepsonA, 1992“What makes a good feature?”MIT, Cambridge, MA, CBIP Paper 72
30.
RockI, 1983The Logic of Perception (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press)
31.
ShaferS A, 1985Shadows and Silhouettes in Computer Vision (Boston, MA: Kluwer)
32.
TarrMKerstenDBülthoffH H (submitted) “Why the visual recognition system might encode the effects of illumination”Vision Research
33.
Da Vinci Leonardo, 1970Notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci (New York: Dover)
34.
WaltzD L, 1972“Understanding line drawings of scenes with shadows”, in The Psychology of Computer Vision Ed. WinstonP (New York: McGraw-Hill)
