****************************************
Applied Vision Association (UK)
A special One-Day Conference/Workshop on
DEPTH PERCEPTION
September 4th 1997
at
The Department of Psychology
University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
*******************************************
*********************************************
Enclosed is the complete program for the meeting. Anyone
wishing to register should send 20 UK pounds to M Bradshaw at
the address above. Lunch and refreshments will be provided.
Registration can be done on the day, but an indication of attendance
must be given beforehand by email (to M.Bradshaw@surrey.ac.uk or
P.Hibbard@surrey.ac.uk) as we need to know numbers for catering.
Full details of the meeting and abstracts can be found on the webpage
http://www.surrey.ac.uk/Psychology/AVA/
Guildford is easily accessible from London (35 mins by train)
and only 50 mins from Heathrow and Gatwick (rail-air links).
.................................................................
Paper Presentations
10.00 Registration and Coffee
10.30 The critical factors determining the strength of the stereoscopic
slant response
Barbara Gillam
11.00 A curious illusion suggests complex interactions in depth perception
Mark Mon-Williams and James R. Tresilian
11.15 Coarse to fine - cyclopean processing
Ariella V. Popple and John M. Findlay.
11.30 Stereo masking reveals spatial-frequency channels.
Simon Prince and Richard Eagle.
11.45 The minimum contrast requirements for stereopsis.
David R. Simmons.
12.00 Dissociating the what and where of stereopsis
Barton L. Anderson.
12.15 Buffet lunch - Minstrels Gallery, Wates House
13.30 Binocular stereopsis: the role of vertical disparities
Brian J. Rogers.
14.00 Perceived depth and retinal disparities.
David Heeley.
14.15 Effects of surface orientation and number of surfaces on perceived
slant in a 3D scene
George J. Andersen, Myron L. Braunstein and Asad Saidpour.
14.30 Cues to viewing distance for stereoscopic depth constancy
Andrew Glennerster, Brian J. Rogers and Mark F. Bradshaw.
14.45 A curvature contrast effect for stereoscopically-defined surfaces
Susan F. te Pas, Brian J. Rogers and Tim Ledgeway
15.00 Posters
16.00 The relationship between depth perception and neural activity in
primary visual cortex.
Bruce G. Cumming and Andrew J. Parker.
16.30 Is global motion processing tuned for binocular disparity ?
Paul B. Hibbard, Mark F. Bradshaw and Bart DeBruyn.
16.45 The recovery of structure from motion under perspective and
orthographic projection.
Richard A. Eagle and Maarten Hogervorst.
17.00 Using multiple sources of information about relative distances between
three collinear dots rotating in a slanted plane.
Johan Wagemans and S. Tibau.
17.15 Grasping the impossible: estimating time to contact from monocular and
binocular parameters.
John Wann and Simon Rushton.
17.30 Posters
..............................................................................
Poster Presentations
Temporal characteristics of stereoscopic slant perception
R.S. Allison, I.P. Howard, B.J. Rogers, and H. Bridge.
Uncoupling binocular disparity from relative luminance and relative size in
stereoscopic displays
Peter Banton and Peter Thompson.
The interaction of binocular disparity and motion parallax in determining
perceived depth and perceived size with natural viewing: is the same
estimate of 'd' used ?
Mark F. Bradshaw, Andrew D. Parton and Richard A. Eagle.
Systematic Perceptual Distortion of the Normal to a Plane may be Explained by
Errors in Perceived Viewing Distance
Philip A. Duke, John P. Frisby, John Porrill, David Buckley.
Visual processing deficits and dyslexia
John Everatt, Mark F Bradshaw, Paul B Hibbard & Martin Lages.
Does temporal delay affect open-loop pointing in adults and children?
Joanna Graham Mark F. Bradshaw and Alyson M. Davis.
The effects of eccentricity, vergence angle and elevation upon the relative
tilt of corresponding vertical and horizontal meridia revealed using the
minimum motion paradigm.
Tim Ledgeway and Brian J. Rogers
Biases in perceived structure from motion explained by a Bayesian model.
Maarten Hogervorst and Richard A. Eagle.
When texture is a stronger depth cue than motion
Justin O'Brien and Alan Johnston.
Perception and measurement of surface orientation
Pascal Mamassian, Michael S. Landy, and Laurence T. Maloney.
A comparison of binocular and monocular detection of sinewave gratings in two-
dimensional noise
S. Pardhan and D. Rose
Is eye of origin labelled?
David Rose.
Stereoscopic depth cues can segment motion information.
Robert J. Snowden and Melissa Rossiter.
Stereo depth perception from linear combination of first and second-order
disparities
Alison K. Statham and Mark A. Georgeson.
The effects of stereoscopic depth upon illusory pausing in random dot patterns
Tim Walpole and Michael J.Wright.
Why do cars hit children?: dismissing the role of relative size in driver
judgements of depth.
John Wann, Simon Rushton and Christine Caldwell.
Range effects in the psychophysical determination of contrast thresholds for
stereopsis.
Alison T. Wells and David R. Simmons.