Talk:Cyclopean image

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cyclopean image article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 April 2020 and 20 July 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): LadyRazzBerry.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

dictionary definition?

Can this ever be more than a dicdef? The Storm Surfer 00:09, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that it be merged with cyclopean stimuli. Darkfrog24 (talk) 01:48, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The pages have been merged with no opposition after three years of "open discussion". WTF? (talk) 16:34, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Florin Horicianu

I'm deleting the section on this guy. As far as I can tell, he apears to be a "theorist" with little to no actual scientific research backing up his claims. This is based on a the contents of this website. 94.98.192.207 (talk) 09:36, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Consider Rephrasing

"The important aspect of this research was that Julesz showed using random dot stereograms (RDSs) that disparity is sufficient for stereopsis, where Charles Wheatstone had only shown that binocular disparity was necessary for stereopsis"

Binocular disparity is a property of vision and perspective--not a 'feature' of stereopis tests. Both Wheatstone and Julesz use disparity to produce stereopsis. The difference between the two stereo-effects has to do with with gestalt (or similar) principles. Two photographs cannot overlap without destroying subject matter. You can however alter a 2D pattern without a person noticing--In regular vision we see a gist of the pattern, and if we use binocular disparity to search for inconsistencies in the pattern--the 3D forms appear as artifacts of the imperfect pattern.

Consider rephrasing that please. Also note that Brewster already mentioned the wall-paper effect, so it's not like Julesz's 'single-image-stereogram' was a novel idea ( just a new technique ). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:BDA8:E370:85C:D766:36CB:5394 (talk) 20:03, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Currently looking into specific research talking about this subject. Also looking into the "third central imaginary eye and binoculus." mentioned in the wiki page. LadyRazzBerry (talk) 04:34, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]