Five pictures, each with a different way of indicating motion, were given to blind and to sighted subjects—as tactual pictures for the blind, and as ink-print pictures for the sighted. The subjects matched the pictures to kinds of motion. The blind subjects concurred with each other and with the sighted in their matches. Therefore the devices are effective without explicit or formal training in their interpretation. The basis for the devices, it is argued, is not convention. Rather, the devices are metaphoric.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArnheimR, 1966Art and Visual Perception (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).
2.
ArnheimR, 1969Visual Thinking (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).
3.
DuncanH FGourlayNHudsonW, 1973A Study of Pictorial Perception among Bantu and White School Children (Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press).
4.
FriedmanS HStevensonM B, 1980 .“Perception of movement in pictures” in The Perception of PicturesVolume 1, Ed HagenM A, (New York: Academic Press) pp 225–256.
5.
GombrichE H, 1963Meditations on a Hobby Horse and Other Essays on the Theory of Art (London: Phaidon Press).
