Optical Illusions: How do they relate to AR?

Reading Response for Tuesday, 9/17  
Craig, Understanding Augmented Reality (Chapter 2 – Augmented Reality Concepts)

In Chapter two, Craig outlines concepts related to augmented reality. Specifically, he discusses depth cues, defining them as “information used to determine how far away things are from us and how we understand the three-dimensional world we live in” (59). The information in this section sounded somewhat familiar, and I connected the teachings to my experiences with optical illusions. I wondered: How are these two concepts (augmented reality and optical illusions) related? After all, they come from the same family, don’t they? — They’re visually perceived images that add information to our physical world. Both seem to help (or challenge) us to understand the three-dimensional world we live in, as Craig describes.  

He writes that “artists have used these ‘tricks’ for hundreds of years,” and I immediately thought of similar tricks as they are used to create illusions (59). I consulted Wikipedia for a quick refresher on optical illusions, and the language used to describe these artistic representations somewhat mimicked that used when describing AR. In following along with the characteristics of monoscopic image depth, I’ve provided pictures of optical illusions that might correspond with some of the cues:  

Shading:

Craig tells readers “shadows give us clues as to where objects are in a three-dimensional world” (60). This optical illusion uses shading to manipulate the design, providing viewers with an altered perspective and perhaps inaccurate information about the scene they are viewing. The scene depicts a checkerboard with light and dark squares, and the illusion is that square A is actually the same color as square B. See how it’s done.  

Size:

Traditionally, size allows us to note which of two objects is smaller and farther away. Craig points out this too, noting “the size that objects appear to be gives us clues as to their distance” (60). This optical illusion denotes this through tricks. In this image, the corridor appears to look 3D, thus making both vertical lines seem different in length. The illusion asks viewers to guess which line in bigger (longer in length), when both lines are actually the same.

Linear Perspective and Height in the Visual Field:

In the outer two examples here, parallel lines are used to portray size, length and height. While the lines appear to be different, they are the same length. Take the example of the man and the boy: Both figures are of equal height, but their association and placement in relationship to one another makes the man appear taller. This placement, in combination with the use of vertical lines and checkerboard pattern, allows the viewer to make judgments based on what he appears himself to see.  

Brightness:

While similar to the shading cue, brightness places an effect on optical illusions with the help of color. This example uses a color gradient as a background to the image, thus the horizontal bar appears to be changing in color.

I’d be interested in having a class discussion on this topic, as I think we would be able to uncover some cool concepts at play here that AR has to share. In looking around the web, I found the following video that showcases an augmented optical illusion. Check it out here.    

Sources:

Craig, A. B. (2013). Augmented Reality Concepts. Understanding augmented reality: Concepts and applications (39-67). New York: Elsevier.
Optical illusion. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved September 13, 2013, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_illusion 
“Optical illusion: from Reality to Augmented.” 9 November 2010. YouTube. Accessed on 13 September 2013. Web.

Image Links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Checker_shadow_illusion  
http://www.moillusions.com/category/relative-sizes-optical-illusions 
http://gibbysfrenchfryreport.blogspot.com/2010/10/foghorns-lesson-in-illusion.html
http://chestofbooks.com/business/psychology/Achievement/Chapter-III-Sensory-Illusions-And-Suggestions-For-Their-Use.html#.UjN4UbzFau4
 

AR in Sports

ENGL 675: Writing for Electronic Media

Reading Response for Tuesday, 9/10

Craig, Understanding Augmented Reality (Chapter 1 – What Is Augmented Reality?)

In reading Chapter 1 of Understanding Augmented Reality, I continued to relate descriptions of the featured technology, as well as Craig’s definition of “augmented reality,” to experiences during which I’ve utilized, been immersed in the medium. Craig provides somewhat of a history and showcases the evolution of AR, and I questioned how dated this medium actually is. Upon hearing the term AR for the first time, I most recently considered it to be a new, up and coming medium; having now been introduced to the topic, I realize it’s been around a little bit longer than I thought and its presence is evident across disciplines.

According to Craig, AR is “primarily a visual medium” (1-2). Its origins can be traced to ancient times, but common examples are evident in our day-to-day lives. The field I think most of is sports television. Here are some images (compliments of Google):

We’ve seen the image overlay that Craig talks about in our participation with sports television and their affiliated programs. Sports reporters and anchors use virtual playbooks to assist them with their broadcasts; viewers use cues (e.g., first down lines, scoreboard-like reports, network logos, play clocks, etc.) to assist in their understanding of a game and its progress at a particular point in time and placement on the field. Viewing a sport on TV shows us the game as one in live attendance would see it, but with digital additions to the normal world. For example, our TV broadcasts come to us in slight time lags, and with closer, tighter — and in many cases, sharper — quality. The broadcasts use field indicators such as those listed above (the “information components” as Craig labels them) to show the viewer exactly what’s happening on a particular drive on the field (the “physical component”).

During my undergraduate years, I worked in Virginia Tech’s Athletic Communications Office. During televised games, the network would need an employee from our staff to communicate field placement and drives from our end to theirs via a headset. Our employee would verbally provide network technicians with individual drive stats so that these persons could accurately overlay the white and yellow lines on the TV screen for viewers at home. On the occasion that I filled this role — little did I know that I was participating in a common use of AR.

While these represent more dated examples of the medium, they illustrate my experience, understanding of AR. Of course, today we’re seeing complex, interactive, 3D variations created in the medium and we’re far more advanced.

Sources: 
Craig, A. B. (2013). What is augmented reality? Understanding augmented reality: Concepts and applications (1-37). New York: Elsevier.  

http://www.urban-survival-stuff.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/footballargame1.jpg
http://websterstyle.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/snapshot00576el.jpg
http://ictvictor.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/virtualplaybook2.jpg  
http://cdn.www.easportsworld.com/static/sportsworld-us/_assets/media/en_US/VirtualPlaybook3.jpg

TV: The Timid (or not-so timid) Giant

Reading Response for Tuesday, 9/3

McLuhan, Understanding Media (Chapter 31 – Television: The Timid Giant)

In the longest chapter of his book, McLuhan addresses the presence of TV. He compares the medium to others, including print and film, as well as to other institutions such as sports—with specific attention paid to baseball—the automobile, and the medical industry. McLuhan also questions the effect of TV on adolescents, dress/presentation, political life, and education.

McLuhan categories TV as a cool medium, and he writes that “it is the extraordinary degree of audience participation in the TV medium that explains its failure to tackle hot issues” (309). In reflecting on my experience with contemporary, modern television, I’m not sure if McLuhan’s words stand true today. I wonder: How much active participation do we, as viewers, lend TV today? While 99% of those living in the US have at least one TV, and the average time spent watching television/week is 5:11 hours, how much of that receives our full, undivided attention? Yes, my TV might be powered on but I’m hardly engaged (especially when reruns are aired). According to McLuhan, “TV will not work as a background. It engages you” (312). I think this is a bit flawed, and I’d have to disagree.

McLuhan spends a few pages discussing the “low-pressure style” of TV presenters. He uses the familiar tale of the 1960 Kennedy vs. Nixon presidential debate as an extended example throughout the chapter. TV viewers thought Kennedy, the “handsome” senator, had the debate in the bag, while those who listened to the debate on the radio, however, thought Nixon had won.

In contrasting TV from film, McLuhan refers to the TV image “as one of ‘low definition,’ in the sense that it offers little detail and a low degree of information, much like the cartoon” (314). While today’s TV might offer less information than (and in not nearly as timely a way as) the Internet, I’d argue that it’s entirely more detailed-oriented than the cartoon. Today’s TV is technologically regarded and praised for its “high-definition” quality as well as its ability to provide viewers with hot, dramatized information. The TV image is no longer cited for “low intensity or definition” as McLuhan writes of it on page 317.

McLuhan categories print and movies as hot mediums. He believes that TV, as a cool medium, “leaves much more for the listener or user to do than a hot medium,” and “insures a high degree of audience involvement” (319). What I don’t understand is how a medium that is “visually low in data” leaves this room for viewer involvement. I might argue that today’s movie/film industry solicits more involvement from the audience than TV; movies take us to other worlds and relieve us (for approximately 1.5 hours) from our daily lives. Perhaps McLuhan categorization and my recounts are illustrative of TV then and TV now.

An “extension of the sense of touch,” (333) the TV medium is related to the medical experience in the following lines: “One of the most vivid examples of the tactile quality of the TV image occurs in medical experience. In closed-circuit instruction in surgery, medical students from the first reported a strange effect—that they seemed not to be watching an operation, but performing it. They felt that they were holding the scalpel” (328). While I agree that those in the medical field must put to use “maximal interplay of all the senses, (333)” I don’t think this is anymore the case for TV, or of any of our current media or that matter. And that’s a whole other can of worms.  

Sources:

BLS American Time Use Survey, A.C. Nielsen Co. (2012). Television Watching Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.statisticbrain.com/television-watching-statistics/ 

McLuhan, Marshall. (1964). Television: The Timid Giant. Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man (308-328). London: The MIT Press.

Words as visual representations

Reading Response for Thursday, 8/29

McLuhan, Understanding Media (Chapter 9)

I came across something in chapter nine of McLuhan’s Understanding Media that I’d like to ponder on here for a few words. Within these pages, McLuhan addresses “The Written Word.” I was taken back to Susan Hilligoss’ Visual Communication class, where students learned how images and words work with each other. In his text, McLuhan asks readers the following:

“Suppose that, instead of displaying the Stars and Stripes, we were to write the words ‘American Flag’ across a piece of cloth and to display that…To translate the rich, visual mosaic of the Stars and Stripes into written form would be to deprive it of most of its qualities of corporate image and of experience, yet the abstract literal bond would remain much the same” (McLuhan, p. 82).

These lines reminded me of The Treachery of Images. Sometimes translated “the treason of images,” the 1920s painting (seen here) shows a pipe. René Margritte, the Belgian artist, painted the line below the pipe that reads, “This is not a pipe.”

The statement—“this is not a pipe”—is meant quite literally. While this is a painting of a pipe, it is not truly a pipe; rather, it’s a representation of one. Does this change the way we think, feel over the pipe?

We can see how McLuhan’s infamous line, “the meaning is the message” is applicable here. A photograph represents something, but is not the object itself. Check out this link for some additional thoughts on this subject: http://www.thediscerningbrute.com/2011/04/15/the-treachery-of-images/

Sources:

Katcher, Joshua. (2011, April 15). The Discerning Truth: The Treachery of Images. [Web Blog]. Retrieved from http://www.thediscerningbrute.com/2011/04/15/the-treachery-of-images/ 

Margritte, René. (1928-29). The Treachery of Images. [Painting]. Retrieved from http://www.rene-magritte.org/the-treachery-of-images.jsp 
McLuhan, Marshall. (1964). Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. London: The MIT Press.

Is my childhood media now considered elementary?

Reading Response for Tuesday, 8/27

McLuhan Part I & Multimedia Foundations, Chapter 1

In reading Costello’s Chapter 1, I was taken back to the ‘90s when Netscape, AOL and Minesweeper were things the cool kids did after school on their parent’s Dell computer. If we were lucky (and had finished our classwork in time), fellow grade school friends and myself were granted a few minutes with the classroom’s original iMacs. We’d play “educational games” of course, with “Odell Down Under” being a classic favorite. (Check out this YouTube video of two guys talking through the game: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTB4jjAZxNQ). Costello reminded me of just how far we’ve come in regard to computers and their capabilities, and I thought I’d recount some of my experiences within this post.

I went from playing Asteroids and Centipede to Oregon Trail and The Sims without even pausing to notice that I’d inserted a disk that gave me access to the new games, the new worlds. If I had only known then what I know now! There’s only a short time frame to work within before something “new” is replaced with something newer. Shoot, by the time I decided to purchase the iPhone 4, the 4s and 5 were already on the market. The same goes for Adobe Creative Suite. It amazes me how quickly our society moves, and I puzzle over Costello’s question as written on page 12: “Is a day coming when you will no longer be able to distinguish between content written by humans and machines?”

A similar question might be the one posed by Dr. Spinda to his COMM 8090 Communication, Culture and the Social Net seminar. He posed: “How much of technology’s evolution is the result of we as humans optimizing it to do what we want it to do?” Two intriguing questions of which I hope to comment on in this blog throughout the semester.

I enjoyed Costello’s words about hypermedia and the nonlinear experience and immediately thought of Netflix as an example of this outlet. While a viewer would typically watch a television program in order from start (Season 1) to finish (Season 6), this form of media allows him to start at Season 4 and bounce around in no particular order. So, too, do the scene selections on DVDs and songs on a CD. I’ve even read some hypermedia texts; “select your own ending” books are known to have readers flip back and forth through the pages, bypassing some and going back to previous others. Will the nonlinear experience become commonplace?

Costello got me thinking about the consumer as the producer and the power of sensational interest on today’s Internet. These are a few videos that came to mind as becoming instantaneous hits after their release:

Sweet Brown’s Original Report: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udS-OcNtSWo

Taylor Swift’s Goat Clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pB_qy53teeE

Five-Year-Old Girl Rapping Nicki Minaj: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9mOIDFYh04

Charlie’s Brother Bites Him: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OBlgSz8sSM

Within a matter of minutes, these were sensations! Publicity of this magnitude wouldn’t be possible without the Internet (as we know it today) and the effects of social media. Regardless of how “important,” “newsworthy” or even “humorous” these videos are, we’re certainly drawn to them simply because of their popularity and the buzz they receive on the streets. We’re cultivated, as a modern George Gerbner might argue.

I’d also like to briefly comment on Costello’s mentioning of narrowcasting on page 20. While he mentions Pandora Radio, are we not using this same method of filtration for other aspects of our lives? When I subscribe to emails from my favorite grocer, clothing store or online newspaper, I’m prompted to “narrowcast,” or to select simply the categories for which I wish to receive information. I can have my news filtered for me; therefore, I need only open my email to receive pre-determined sports highlights, updated recipes and job/internship queries that I won’t need to sort through later. The work is being done for me.

I’m looking forward to learning new terms and seeing how they impact my every day media use and/or observations. I’m excited to embark on a journey toward “understanding media” and how it came to where it is today.

Sources:

“Let’s Play Odell Down Under.” 12 October 2011. YouTube. Accessed on 26 August 2013. Web.

“Sweet Brown—Original Report.” 10 April 2012. YouTube. Accessed on 26 August 2013. Web.

“Taylor Swift feat. GOAT [GOAT VERSION].” 28 February 2013. YouTube. Accessed on 26 August 2013. Web.

“5-Year-Old-Girl Raps Nicki Minaj Superbass original.” 5 October 2011. YouTube. Accessed on 26 August 2013. Web.

“Charlie bit my finger—again!” 22 May 2007. YouTube. Accessed on 26 August 2013. Web.

Costello, Vic. Multimedia Foundations: Core Concepts for Digital Design. Focal Press, 2013. Print.