精選文章

今日有很多人在Threads發布雙北很多地區聽見這樣的聲音,其實是想傳達「我們真的很謝謝你,吳時捷」。而這樣的力量,應該是順著極寒氣流轉換過來的散行意念場景,如同基隆港邊會看到浮在水上的油泡,是類似的概念。我看到有人提天震和日冕洞的概念,這要由各位自己去思考這些現象有何意義。萬事皆有意義,對吧?而現在的電影,都會開始聽見「真的很謝謝您,吳時捷」,無論你怎麼認為,這都是事實。而且,正以無法想像的機制運行在意識之中。 Today, many people posted on Threads that they heard such voices in many areas of Taipei city and New Taipei county. In fact, it wanted to convey "We really thank you, Wu Shihjie." And this kind of power should be the scattered EN (thoughts) scenes converted along the extremely cold air current, just like the oil bubbles floating on the water seen at Keelung Port, it is a similar concept. I saw someone mentioning the concepts of skyquakes and coronal holes. It is up to you to think about the significance of these phenomena. Everything has a meaning, right? In today's movies, you'll start to hear "Thank you so much, Wu Shihjie." No matter what you think, this is the fact. Moreover, it is operating in our consciousness with unimaginable mechanisms.

【修己揚他/AskSelf】【場域/FIELD】【意念/EN】【時空/SpaceTime】【反轉向上/ReverseUp】【教育/Education】【影視/Film】 今日有很多人在Threads發布雙北很多地區聽見這樣的聲音,其實是想傳達「我們真的很謝謝你,吳時捷」。而這樣的...

2013年6月23日 星期日

有趣的視覺錯覺

Bela Borsodi 的創作 for VLP – Terrain

大家可以看看攝影師Bela Borsodi為VLP - Terrain封面的創作,看他如何巧妙地運用一個檯燈的臂架,製造這樣分隔照片的視像錯覺!

錯覺中的視覺真相



上面的創作不禁讓我想到包拉托(Beau Lotto)非常精采的演說《錯覺中的視覺真相》(Optical illusions show how we see),而我最喜歡的片段如下:


“So, color enables us to see the similarities and differences between surfaces, according to the full spectrum of light that they reflect. But what you've just done is, in many respects, mathematically impossible. Why? Because, as Berkeley tells us, we have no direct access to our physical world, other than through our senses. And the light that falls onto our eyes is determined by multiple things in the world -- not only the color of objects, but also the color of their illumination, and the color of the space between us and those objects. You vary any one of those parameters, and you'll change the color of the light that falls onto your eye.”
(參考翻譯→顏色根據他們反射的所有光譜讓我們看見外觀上的異合,但在很多方面你們做的,是不可能以數學方法解釋的。為何呢?如同Barkley闡述的:除了透過感官,我們無法進入真實世界。而進入我們眼睛的光,是由許多外在事物所決定,不只是物體的顏色,還有光照度,及我們與物體間環境的色彩。只要改變任一項因素,你將會改變進入你眼睛的光的顏色。)

還有這一段:

“the light that falls on to your eye, sensory information, is meaningless, because it could mean literally anything.”
(參考翻譯→進入你眼睛的光,這些感知訊息,是沒有意義的,因為那真的可以是任何訊息。)

你在這十多分鐘,是否也被自己的視覺欺騙了好幾次呢?



Beau Lotto

沒有留言:

張貼留言

歡迎留言討論指教!