You can also create mandala in Photoshop with this action script. This set contains a Photoshop action script that will allow you to create realistic kaleidoscope effects and also kaleidoscope animations out of any type of image. Animated Kaleidoscope Photoshop Tool.
Kaleidoscopic deprivation produced effects indistinguishable from traditional light-tight patching. Here, we used a novel “kaleidoscopic” monocular deprivation that, although it rendered images fractionated and uninformative, preserved gross luminance, color, spatial frequency, motion, and contrast information, effectively sneaking the image degradation past early, feedforward mechanisms, targeting higher levels. This could be accommodated in a feedforward model of binocular combination (Meese, Georgeson, & Baker, 2006 Sperling & Ding, 2010), in which the shift reflects a (persistent) reweighting induced by an interocular gain control mechanism tasked with maintaining binocular balance (Zhou, Clavagnier, et al., 2013). Various types of deprivation—light-tight, diffuser lenses, image degradation—have been tested, and it seemed that a deprivation of contrast was necessary, and sufficient, for these shifts.
Switch between mandala and kaleidoscope visual modes. Create eye-pleasing gradients and color variations. Choose between various brush types or create your own. Huge expression variability. In addition, since the suppression of the kaleidoscopic image likely requires feedback from higher-level processes capable of determining the behavioral relevance of an eye's information (Foley & Miyanshi, 1969 Jiang, Costello, & He, 2007 Kovács, Papathomas, Yang, & Fehér, 1996 Wolf & Hochstein, 2011), feedforward-only models may need to be elaborated.Paint beautiful animated swirling patterns and kaleidoscope artworks.
( 2013) extended this finding by showing that the deprived eye has greater influence in dichoptic phase combination, global motion coherence (GMC), and contrast matching tasks. ( 2011) first observed that short-term (150-min) monocular deprivation with a translucent patch affected the dynamics of binocular rivalry, resulting in the previously deprived eye prevailing twice as often as the nondeprived eye. The files produced by the conversion are true Krystal DPM system effect files able to be loaded into.Lunghi et al. Rotate & Zoom with multitouch.Kaleidoscope effect files to Krystal effect files.
Under this idea, deprivation triggers interocular contrast gain control (Moradi & Heeger, 2009 Shapley & Enroth-Cugell, 1984 Sperling & Ding, 2010), whereby gain is increased in the deprived eye and decreased in the nondeprived eye (Zhou, Clavagnier, et al., 2013) in an assumedly compensatory, homeostatic attempt (Fox & Stryker, 2017 Turrigiano & Nelson, 2000) to restore interocular balance. Taken together, it seemed that feedforward, contrast energy–based models of deprivation sufficed to explain these effects. In addition, because phase scrambling did not induce deprivation effects, it seemed that a reduction in the amplitude of the high-frequency components was not just sufficient but also necessary to induce shifts in eye balance. They concluded that deprivation in overall monocular contrast was not necessary to induce short-term deprivation effects, because the removal of just high-frequency contrast information was sufficient (i.e., low-pass filtering triggered deprivation effects, while high-pass did not). In an effort to evaluate the determinants of this new form of short-term plasticity, Zhou, Reynaud, and Hess ( 2014) studied the consequence of other types of monocular deprivation such as band-pass filtering, parametric reductions in contrast, and contrast-preserving phase scrambling.
1 A summary of these results is provided in Table 1.Given these challenges to the feedforward, contrast-deprivation triggered account of short-term monocular deprivation, we hypothesized that feedback from higher-level areas, tuned to image utility, may play a role. ( 2011), but did not influence dichoptic phase combination, consistent with the phase-scrambling results of Zhou et al. However, this effect was found only on the dynamics of binocular rivalry, extending the results of Lunghi et al. They were able to find deprivation effects with a pink-noise deprivation (in which the power spectrum is preserved and phase information is replaced with that of white noise), even though this manipulation nominally preserves high spatial frequency power. Further complicating this picture were recent findings of Bai, Dong, He, and Bao ( 2017). A contrast gain control system, purportedly responsible for maintaining balance between the eyes under normal viewing conditions, failing to respond to such a large reduction in the contrast of one eye would be of limited utility.
Thus, in the conflict between the two eyes' images during deprivation, the eye that allows for useful interaction with the environment (i.e., the open eye) is prioritized, suppressing the less-useful one (the kaleidoscopic patched). However, the degradation of the kaleidoscopic image, and consequently the trigger to alter interocular balance, should be clear to any higher area sensitive to image utility for active vision. This means that although the conflict (lack of synchronicity Zhou et al., 2014) between the images may be apparent to early visual areas, the determination of which eye is degraded is indeterminate. In our procedure, while wearing the kaleidoscopic lens on the deprived eye, the nondeprived eye was left open ( Figure 1c), and participants were asked to engage in normal, active vision outside the laboratory for the 150-min deprivation period. Figure 1 shows the view of a scene as seen through the kaleidoscopic lens.
Unless otherwise specified, observers were seated 57 cm from the display in a quiet, dark room. Dichoptic stimuli were presented using NVIDIA 3D Vision 2 LCD shutter goggles synchronized to the monitor at 120 Hz with interleaved frames presented to each eye at 60 Hz. GMC and rivalry stimuli were presented on a calibrated three-dimensional (3D) ASUS monitor with a resolution of 1,080 × 1,024.
Evaluating dichoptic GMC thresholds offers insights into the effect of deprivation on dichoptic interactions. The kaleidoscopic lens ( “Future Eyes Kaleidoscope Glasses and Crystal Necklace Monocles,” 2017) was fitted into one of the openings in a pair of spectacles, with the other opening left empty ( Figure 1c).Global motion processing has been known to involve two processing stages: an initial local motion detection stage that is contrast dependent and a later motion integration stage that is contrast invariant (Hess, Hutchinson, Ledgeway, & Mansouri, 2007). Li & Lu, 2012) to expand gray-scale bit depth from 8 to 16 bits.
The remaining dots were designated as “noise” dots and each had a consistent, but random angle, motion vector. The dot field consisted of 100 dots (each subtending 0.1°), some of which were designated as “signal” dots and had coherent, infinite lifetime translational motion. Dots had a Weber contrast of 64% presented on a uniform, gray background (with an average luminance of ∼12.5 cd/m 2, as measured through the shutter goggles). The aperture subtended 8° of visual angle from a viewing distance of 57 cm.
On each trial, observers were asked to discriminate the global direction of the dot field (left or right), and their response was recorded by a key press. GMC thresholds were measured using a single-interval, direction discrimination task controlled by an adaptive PSI procedure (Prins, 2012). Dots could be presented dichoptically, with signal dots in one eye and noise in the other, or monocularly, with both signal and noise dots in one eye and empty background in the other ( Figure 2a and 2b, respectively).
Sessions were blocked by condition (dichoptic or monocular). Each block took approximately 10 min to complete.Schematic of global motion coherence (GMC) tests. There were 180 trials for each condition within one session. The two dichoptic and the two monocular conditions were mixed within blocks.
0 kommentar(er)
