The present study examined the joint contribution of shading and stereopsis to the perception of shape convexity–concavity. The stimuli were the images of a synthetic convex 3-D shape seen from viewpoints leading to ambiguity as to its convexity. Illumination came from either above or below, and from either the right or the left, and stimuli were presented dichoptically with normal binocular disparity, reversed disparity, or no disparity. Participants responded “convex” more often when the lighting came from above than from below. Also, participants responded that the shape was convex more often with normal than with zero disparity, and more often with zero disparity than with reversed stereopsis. The effects of lighting direction and display mode were additive—that is, they did not interact. This indicates that shading and stereopsis contribute independently to shape perception.
AdamsW. J. (2007). A common light-prior for visual search, shape, and reflectance judgements. Journal of Vision, 7(11):11, 1–7.
2.
BraunsteinM. L.AndersenG. J.RouseM. W.TittleJ. S. (1986). Recovering viewer-centered depth from disparity, occlusion and velocity gradients. Perception & Psychophysics, 40, 216–224.
3.
BrewsterD. (1826). On the optical illusion of the conversion of cameos into intaglios and of intaglios into cameos, with an account of another analogous phenomena. Edinburgh Journal of Science, 4, 99–108.
4.
BülthoffH. H.MallotH. A. (1988). Integration of depth modules: Stereo and shading. Journal of Optical Society of America, 5, 1749–1758.
5.
BülthoffH. H.MallotH. A. (1990). Integration of stereo, shading and texture. In BlakeA.TrosciankoT. (Eds.), AI and the eye (pp. 119–146). Toronto, ON: Wiley.
6.
ChampionR. A.AdamsW. J. (2007). Modification of the convexity prior but not the light-from- above prior in visual search with shaded objects. Journal of Vision, 7(13):10, 1–10.
7.
ConnorC. E. (2001). Visual perception: Sunny side up. Current Biology, 11(19), R776–R778.
8.
DosherB. A.SperlingG.WurstS. A. (1986). Tradeoffs between stereopsis and proximity luminance covariance as determinants of perceived 3D structure. Vision Research, 26, 973–990.
9.
GerardinP.de MontalembertM.MamassianP. (2007). Shape from shading: New perspectives from the Polo Mint stimulus. Journal of Vision, 7(11):13, 1–11.
10.
HillH.BruceV. (1994). A comparison between the hollow-face and ‘hollow-potato’ illusions. Perception, 23, 1335–1337.
11.
HillisJ. M.WattS. J.LandyM. S.BanksM. S. (2004). Slant from texture and disparity cues: Optimal cue combination. Journal of Vision, 4(12):1, 967–992.
12.
IchikawaM.EgusaH. (1993). How is depth perception affected by long-term wearing of left- right reversing spectacles?Perception, 22, 971–984.
13.
IchikawaM.EgusaH.NakatsukaM.AmanoJ.UedaT.TashiroT. (2003). Modification of depth and distance perception caused by long-term wearing of left-right reversing spectacles. Perception, 32, 131–153.
14.
IshigushiA.WolfeJ. M. (1993). Asymmetrical effect of crossed and uncrossed disparity on stereoscopic capture. Perception, 22, 1403–1413.
15.
KleffnerD. A.RamachandranV. S. (1992). On the perception of shape from shading. Perception & Psychophysics, 52, 18–36.
16.
KnillD. C.SaundersJ. A. (2003). Do human optimally integrate stereo and texture information for judgement of surface slants?Vision Research, 43, 2536–2558.
17.
LandyM. S.MaloneyL. T.JohnstonE. B.YoungM. (1995). Measurement and modeling of depth cue combination: In defense of weak fusion. Vision Research, 35, 389–412.
18.
LangerM. S.BülthoffH. H. (2000). Depth discrimination from shading under diffuse lighting. Perception, 29, 649–660.
19.
LangerM. S.BülthoffH. H. (2001). A prior for global convexity in local shape from shading. Perception, 30, 403–410.
20.
LiuB.ToddJ. T. (2004). Perceptual biases in the interpretation of 3D shape-from-shading. Vision Research, 44, 2135–2145.
21.
LiuY.VogelsR.OrbanG. A. (2004). Convergence of depth from texture and depth from disparity in macaque inferior temporal cortex. The Journal of Neuroscience, 24, 3795–3800.
22.
MamassianP.GoutcherR. (2001). Prior knowledge on the illumination position. Cognition, 81, B1–B9.
23.
MamassianP.LandyM. S. (1998). Observer biases in the 3D interpretation of line drawings. Vision Research, 38, 2817–2832.
24.
MamassianP.LandyM. S. (2001). Interaction of visual prior constraints. Vision Research, 41, 2653–2668.
NormanJ. F.ToddJ. T. (1995). The perception of 3-D structure from contradictory optical patterns. Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 826–834.
29.
PattersonR.CaykoR.ShortL.FlanaganR.MoeL.TaylorE.DayP. (1995). Temporal differences between crossed and uncrossed stereoscopic mechanisms. Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 891–897.
30.
RamachandranV. S. (1988). Perception of shape from shading. Nature, 331(6152), 163–166.
31.
ReichelF. D.ToddJ. T. (1990). Perceived depth inversion of smoothly curved surface due to image orientation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 653–664.
32.
SaundersJ. A.BackusB. T. (2006). Perception of surface slant from oriented textures. Journal of Vision, 6(9):3, 882–897.
33.
ShimojoS.NakajimaY. (1981). Adaptation to the reversal of binocular depth cues: Effects of wearing left-right reversing spectacles on stereoscopic depth perception. Perception, 10, 391–402.
34.
StevensK. A.BrookesA. (1988). Integrating stereopsis with monocular interpretations of planar surfaces. Vision Research, 28, 371–386.
35.
SunJ.PeronaP. (1998). Where is the sun?Nature Neuroscience, 1, 183–184.
36.
TamW. J.StelmachL. B. (1998). Display duration and stereoscopic depth discrimination. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52, 56–61.
37.
ThomasR.NardiniM.MareschalD. (2010). Interaction between “light-from-above” and convexity priors in visual development. Journal of Vision, 10(8):6, 1–7.
38.
TsutsuiK.SakataH.NaganumaT.TaicaM. (2002). Neural correlates for perception of 3D surface orientation from texture gradient. Science, 298(5592), 409–412.
39.
YellottJ. I.KaiwiJ. L. (1979). Depth inversion despite stereopsis: The appearance of random-dot stereograms on surfaces seen in reverse perspective. Perception, 8, 135–142.
