Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Shape of Space

  • Chapter
Shape Perception in Human and Computer Vision

Part of the book series: Advances in Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition ((ACVPR))

Abstract

We consider the shape of “visual space”. One immediate complication is that there are numerous “visual spaces”, often confused in the literature. Here we focus on visual awareness, rather than optically guided behavior, and “contemplative”, rather than “enactive” vision. Even so, the number of conceptually different “visual spaces” is appreciable. Important distinctions are between visual space as a rigid image of physical space, and visual space as an entity that depends critically upon an observer’s present state. For instance, in judging the relation between two locations, an observer may fixate one or the other. Conceivably, “visual space” will change the moment the observer swaps fixations. If that is indeed the case, then many of the conventional ways to address visual space, or to analyze raw psychophysical data, become effectively invalid. Here we re-analyze a number of available data-sets from such a perspective. We suggest that our notions of “the shape of visual space” need revision and re-investigation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    “Enaction” was introduced by Jerome Bruner [2, 3] who distinguished between iconic and symbolic knowledge. It is presently (also by us) used for knowledge that comes through action. It is acquired through motor skilled motor actions, such as handling objects and locomotion. Enactive vision is not necessarily accompanied by any acute visual awareness.

  2. 2.

    “Contemplation” is commonly defined as “to admire something and think about it”. It typically involves no motor action, but acute awareness, and is akin to meditation. Contemplative vision is also akin to artistic vision, and is so described in Hildebrand [10] with the notion of “far image” (G. Fernbild), and “serenely viewing eye” (G. das ruhig schauende Auge).

  3. 3.

    One distinguishes “interospecific” and “exterospecific” information. We don’t use the origin of the terms, but they were used by Gibson [7] to differentiate between information that relates to the observer and to the external world. For an ideal camera–eye eye–movements do not reveal any novel information about the scene, since no novel perspectives are gained. They lead to pure interospecific information. (E.g., the optic nerve activity may be used to monitor eye movements.)

References

  1. Berkeley G An essay towards a new theory of vision. Printed by Aaron Rhames, at the Back of Dick’s Coffee-House, for Jeremy Pepyat, Bookseller Skinner-Rows Dublin, MDCCIX

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bruner J (1966) Toward a theory of instruction. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bruner J (1968) Processes of cognitive growth: infancy. Clark University Press, Worcester

    Google Scholar 

  4. Coxeter HSM (1989) Introduction to geometry. Wiley classics library Series. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  5. Doumen MJA, Kappers AML, Koenderink JJ (2005) Visual space under free viewing conditions. Percept Psychophys 67:1177–1189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gibson DJJ (1950) The perception of the visual world. Houghton Mifflin, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gibson JJ (1986) The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  8. von Helmholtz H (1892) Handbuch der physiologischen Optik. Voss, Hamburg

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hilbert D, Cohn-Vossen S (1952) Geometry and the imagination, 2nd edn. Chelsea, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Hildebrand A (1893) In: Das Problem der Form in der bildenden Kunst. Heitz, Strassburg

    Google Scholar 

  11. Koenderink JJ (2011) Geometry of imaginary spaces. J Physiol (Paris). doi:10.1016/j.jphysparis.2011.11.002

    Google Scholar 

  12. Koenderink JJ, van Doorn AJ (2008) The structure of visual spaces. J Math Imaging Vis 31:171–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Koenderink JJ, van Doorn AJ (2012) Gauge fields in pictorial space. SIAM J Imaging Sci 5(4):1213–1233

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Koenderink JJ, van Doorn AJ, Lappin JS (2000) Direct measurement of the curvature of visual space. Perception 29:69–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Koenderink JJ, van Doorn AJ, Kappers AML, Todd JT (2002) Pappus in optical space. Percept Psychophys 64:380–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Koenderink JJ, van Doorn AJ, Kappers AML, Lappin JS (2002) Large-scale visual frontoparallels under full-cue conditions. Perception 31:1467–1476

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Koenderink JJ, van Doorn AJ, Lappin JS (2003) Exocentric pointing to opposite targets. Acta Psychol 112:71–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Koenderink JJ, van Doorn AJ, Kappers AML, Doumen MJA, Todd JT (2008) Exocentric pointing in depth. Vis Res 48:716–723

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Koenderink JJ, van Doorn AJ, Todd JT (2009) Wide distribution of external local sign in the normal population. Psychol Res 73:14–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Koenderink JJ, van Doorn AJ, de Ridder H, Oomes AHJ (2010) Visual rays are parallel. Perception 39:1163–1171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Koenderink JJ, Albertazzi L, van Doorn AJ, van Ee R, van de Grind WA, Kappers AML, Lappin JS, Norman JF, Oomes AHJ, te Pas SF, Phillips F, Pont SC, Richards WA, Todd JT, Verstraten FAJ, de Vries S (2010) Does monocular visual space contain planes? Acta Psychol 134:40–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Koenderink JJ, van Doorn AJ, Wagemans J (2011) Depth. i-Perception 2:541–564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Luneburg RK (1950) The metric of binocular visual space. J Opt Soc Am 50:637–642

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Mach E (1906) Space and geometry. Open Court Publishing, Chicago

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Necker LA (1832) Observations on some remarkable optical phaenomena seen in Switzerland; and on an optical phænomenon which occurs on viewing a figure of a crystal or geometrical solids. Lond Edinburgh Philos Mag J Sci 1(5):329–337

    Google Scholar 

  26. Oomes AHJ, Koenderink JJ, van Doorn AJ, de Ridder H (2009) What are the uncurved lines in our visual field? A fresh look at Helmholtz’s checkerboard. Perception 38:1284–1294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Pont SC, Nefs HT, van Doorn AJ, Wijntjes MWA, te Pas SF, de Ridder H, Koenderink JJ (2012) Depth in box spaces. Seeing Perceiving 25:339–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Riemann B (1854) Über die Hypothesen, welche der Geometrie zu Grunde liegen. Aus dem dreizehnten Bande der Abhandlungen der Königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, 10 June 1854

    Google Scholar 

  29. Wagemans J, van Doorn AJ, Koenderink JJ (2011) Measuring 3D point configurations in pictorial space. i-Perception 2:77–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the Methusalem program by the Flemish Government (METH/08/02), awarded to Johan Wagemans.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Experimental Psychology, University of Leuven (K.U. Leuven), Tiensestraat 102, box 3711, 3000, Leuven, Belgium

    Jan Koenderink

  2. Faculteit Sociale Wetenschappen, Afdeling Psychologische Functieleer, Utrecht University, Willem C. van Unnikgebouw 17.24.C, Heidelberglaan 2, 3584 CS, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Jan Koenderink

  3. Industrial Design, Delft University of Technology, Landbergstraat 15, 2628 CE, Delft, The Netherlands

    Andrea van Doorn

Authors
  1. Jan Koenderink
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrea van Doorn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan Koenderink .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, King's College Road 6, Toronto, M5S 3G4, Ontario, Canada

    Sven J. Dickinson

  2. Department of Psychological Sciences, Purdue University, Third Street 703, West Lafayette, 47907, Indiana, USA

    Zygmunt Pizlo

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Koenderink, J., van Doorn, A. (2013). The Shape of Space. In: Dickinson, S., Pizlo, Z. (eds) Shape Perception in Human and Computer Vision. Advances in Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-5195-1_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-5195-1_10

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-5194-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-5195-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation