Virtual slants of obliquely viewed figures consisting of skewed grids, computed as a function of depicted slant and slant of the physical surface, were compared with perceived slants in both monocular and binocular viewing conditions. Computations were based on an assumption of parallelism. Perceived slant was well-correlated with virtual slant, even though slants were generally underestimated. The qualitative relationship between virtual slants and physical surface slants was variable, and liable to produce different degrees and directions of apparent rotation as well as of apparent compensation, depending on the depicted slant of the stimulus. Contributions of screen-related cues were small and mainly limited to small slants. Remarkably, binocular disparity did not have any effect on perceived slant. The results imply that many past findings of both transformation and (apparent) compensation in pictorial viewing may in principle be straightforwardly explained as a function of the virtual stimulus.
BeerJ, 1990“Facilitation effects with the order of presentation of the Necker cube and Schroeder staircase”Perceptual & Motor Skills711265–1266
2.
CookN DHayashiTAmemiyaTSuzukiKLeumannL, 2002“Effects of visual-field inversions on the reverse-perspective illusion”Perception311147–1151
3.
CookN DYutsudoAFujimotoNMurataM, 2008a, “Factors contributing to depth perception: Behavioural studies on the reverse perspective illusion”Spatial Vision21397–405
4.
CookN DYutsudoAFujimotoNMurataM, 2008b“On the visual cues contributing to pictorial depth perception”Empirical Studies of the Arts2669–92
5.
CuttingJ E, 1987“Rigidity in cinema seen from the front row, side aisle”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance13323–334
6.
CuttingJ E, 1988“Affine distortions of pictorial space: Some predictions for Goldstein (1987) that la Gournerie, 1859 might have made”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance14305–311
7.
ErkelensC J, 2012“Contribution of disparity to the perception of 3D shape as revealed by bistability of stereoscopic Necker cubes”Seeing and Perceiving25561–567
8.
FarberJRosinskiR R, 1978“Geometric transformations of pictured space”Perception7269–282
9.
GoldsteinE, 1979“Rotation of objects in pictures viewed at an angle”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance578–87
10.
GoldsteinE, 1987“Spatial layout, orientation relative to the observer, and perceived projection in pictures viewed at an angle”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance13256–266
11.
GoldsteinE, 1988“Geometry or not geometry—perceived orientation and spatial layout in pictures viewed at an angle”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance14312–314
HalloranT O, 1993“The frame turns also: Factors in differential rotation in pictures”Perception & Psychophysics54496–508
14.
HeldR TCooperE ABanksM S, 2012“Blur and disparity are complementary cues to depth”Current Biology22426–431
15.
HillHBruceV, 1993“Independent effects of lighting, orientation, and stereopsis on the hollow-face illusion”Perception22887–897
16.
HillisJ MWattS JLandyM SBanksM S, 2004“Slant from texture and disparity cues: Optimal cue combination”Journal of Vision4(12):1, 967–992
17.
JacobsR A, 1999“Optimal integration of texture and motion cues to depth”Vision Research393621–3629
18.
JohnstonE BCummingB GLandyM S, 1994“Integration of stereopsis and motion shape cues”Vision Research342259–2275
19.
JohnstonE BCummingB GParkerA J, 1993“Integration of depth modules—stereopsis and texture”Vision Research33813–826
20.
JuleszB, 1960“Binocular depth perception of computer generated patterns”Bell Systems Technical Journal391125–1162
21.
KnillD C, 2007“Robust cue integration: A Bayesian model and evidence from cue-conflict studies with stereoscopic and figure cues to slant”Journal of Vision7(7):5, 1–24
22.
KnillD CSaundersJ A, 2003“Do humans optimally integrate stereo and texture information for judgments of surface slant?Vision Research432539–2558
23.
KoenderinkJ Jvan DoornA JKappersA M LToddJ T, 2004“Pointing out of the picture”Perception33513–530
24.
KubovyM, 1986The Psychology of Perspective and Renaissance Art (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
25.
LandyM SMaloneyL TJohnstonE BYoungM, 1995“Measurement and modeling of depth cue combination: In defense of weak fusion”Vision Research35389–412
26.
NichollsA LKennedyJ M, 1993“Angular subtense effects on perception of polar and parallel projections of cubes”Perception & Psychophysics54763–772
27.
PapathomasT V, 2002“Experiments on the role of painted cues in Hughes's reverspectives”Perception31521–530
28.
PapathomasT V, 2007“Art pieces that ‘move’ in our minds: An explanation of illusory motion based on depth reversal”Spatial Vision2179–95
29.
PapathomasT VBakerNYeshuaA SZhuangXNgA, 2012“The ingenious Mr. Hughes: Combining forced, flat, and reverse perspective all in one art piece to pit objects against surfaces”i-Perception3182–187
30.
PapathomasT VBonoL M, 2004“Experiments with a hollow mask and reverspective: Top-down influences in the inversion effect for 3-D stimuli”Perception331129–1138
31.
PapathomasT VKourtziZWelchmanA E, 2010“Perspective-based illusory movement in a flat billboard—an explanation”Perception391086–1093
32.
PerkinsD N, 1973“Compensating for distortion in viewing pictures obliquely”Perception & Psychophysics1413–18
33.
RogersBGyaniA, 2010“Binocular disparities, motion parallax, and geometric perspective in Patrick Hughes's ‘reverspectives’: Theoretical analysis and empirical findings”Perception39330–348
34.
RosinskiR RMulhollandTDegelmanDFarberJ, 1980“Picture perception: An analysis of visual compensation”Perception & Psychophysics28521–526
35.
SaundersJ ABackusB T, 2007“Both parallelism and orthogonality are used to perceive 3D slant of rectangles from 2D images”Journal of Vision7(6):7, 1–11
36.
SedgwickH A, 1980“The geometry of spatial layout in pictorial representation”, in The Perception of Pictures Ed. HagenM A, (volume 1) (New York: Academic Press) pp 33–90
37.
SedgwickH A, 1991“The effect of viewpoint on the virtual space of pictures”, in Pictorial Communication in Virtual and Real Environments Eds EllisS RKaiserM KGrunwaldA C, (London: Taylor & Francis) pp 460–469
StevensK ALeesMBrookesA, 1991“Combining binocular and monocular curvature features”Perception20425–440
40.
TodorovićD, 2008“Is pictorial perception robust? The effect of the observer vantage point on the perceived depth structure of linear-perspective images”Perception37106–125
41.
TylerC W, 2004“Theory of texture discrimination based on higher-order perturbations in individual texture samples”Vision Research442179–2186
42.
van EeR, 2005“Dynamics of perceptual bi-stability for stereoscopic slant rivalry and a comparison with grating, house-face, and Necker-cube rivalry”Vision Research4529–40
43.
van EeRAdamsW JMamassianP, 2003“Bayesian modelling of perceived slant in bistable stereoscopic perception”Journal of the Optical Society of America201398–1406
44.
van EeRvan DamL CErkelensC J, 2002“Bi-stability in perceived slant when binocular disparity and monocular perspective specify different slants”Journal of Vision2(9):2, 597–607
45.
VishwanathDGirshickA RBanksM S, 2005“Why pictures look right when viewed from the wrong place”Nature Neuroscience81401–1410
46.
WadeN JHughesP, 1999“Fooling the eyes: Trompe l'oeil and reverse perspective”Perception281115–1119
47.
WallachHMarshallF J, 1986“Shape constancy in pictorial representation”Perception & Psychophysics39233–235
48.
YoungM JLandyM SMaloneyL T, 1993“A perturbation analysis of depth perception from combinations of texture and motion cues”Vision Research332685–2695
