3 ms·
The last picture in the article is an interesting counter-example: a line drawing that's constructed in a fairly natural way that is nevertheless almost impossi
by regularfry 3y ago
The last picture in the article is an interesting counter-example: a line drawing that's constructed in a fairly natural way that is nevertheless almost impossible to interpret. I'm sure there are "line art rules" that picture breaks which are almost second nature to someone who's been in the game for as long as you have; the interesting thing is how that translates to the visual cortex and why those rules work.
- timacles 3y agoThat one isn't a line drawing, its a shadow relief drawing with depth removed. Then with with outlines applied to the shadows. Even then, the only reason why its so "confusing" to us is because they applied some kind of random black shape to the background which extends above his head to the left. The black background blends with the man's body making an amorphous blob. If it was removed you'd be able to instantly tell thats a bald mans head. You are correct about the "line art rules" they're all just basic visual rules that the brain uses that artists have been playing with for 100s of years. Its no different than those illusions that look like a Grandma or young woman at the same time. All it takes is one conspicuously placed shape and your whole perspective can be thrown off. No different from how camo works: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_coloration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_coloration Anyway, my point being, this isn't some new phenomenon, its a well understood at this point.