Zooming through the human brain in space and time: a look at perception and memory processes
Aude Oliva I learned from Aude that SEEING a beautiful image for a few milliseconds does not necessarily make it memorable. In fact, subjective judgement beforehand won't allow you to KNOW if you will remember the image or not. Fascinating in terms of understanding immediate imprint of visual information. However, I am more a painter than a SnapChat addict, so I know there is a lot to gain from slow painting - at least as much as from premier coup. Therefore, I wonder wether looking at the image for a little longer than that (ex 10 minutes) would lead to more familiarity, appreciation or dislike, and thus memorability? The experiment may be worth conducting, and the results more applicable in the art world (that I am interested in) than for social network innovation.
I also learned from Aude that the shape of objects (or faces) and the shape of space are processed through two distinct pathways in the brain. This is fascinating because it resonates with my understanding of brain functioning as a neurologist and applies directly to my work as an artist. I am thinking this may explain why it is so hard to integrate the background while painting a still life, unless space becomes an object to paint by itself. For example look at how the background is integrated in Cezanne's Still life with flower holder (left) and compare with Wettstein's Just an Old bottle... (right). I would love to record your brain while you are doing it. I would bet that when you look at each of these still lifes, the visual information is processed through two distinct pathways in your brain. The fact that this may happen after looking at it for only a few milliseconds, as the work of Aude on photos of objects suggests, makes it even more powerful.
I also learned from Aude that the shape of objects (or faces) and the shape of space are processed through two distinct pathways in the brain. This is fascinating because it resonates with my understanding of brain functioning as a neurologist and applies directly to my work as an artist. I am thinking this may explain why it is so hard to integrate the background while painting a still life, unless space becomes an object to paint by itself. For example look at how the background is integrated in Cezanne's Still life with flower holder (left) and compare with Wettstein's Just an Old bottle... (right). I would love to record your brain while you are doing it. I would bet that when you look at each of these still lifes, the visual information is processed through two distinct pathways in your brain. The fact that this may happen after looking at it for only a few milliseconds, as the work of Aude on photos of objects suggests, makes it even more powerful.
 |  |
Finally, I learned from Aude that modifying faces thanks to a computer program, can make them more (or less) memorable after looking at them for only a few milliseconds. I felt like we were walking on a slippery slope here. I would love to hear Aude discuss how she deals with ethics in her research on memorability, if we chose this theme for an upcoming neuroesthetics conference.
This is part of a series of posts on the 11th International Conference on Neuroesthetics (September 2014).
RSS Feed