This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Don't want to complain, but that afterimage I get from the "Afterimage"-thing is definitely blue on pink rather than blue on maroon.-- 91.180.143.27 ( talk) 15:35, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Any pictures besides the United States flag (with appropriate color substitution) to include in the main Afterimage page??
The inverse U.S. flag is a fairly classic example of the afterimage effect; I've seen it elsewhere. Why do you want to change it?
It is unbelievable the subversiveness of having to fix our eyes on the USA flag. Why not another country? If you saw it, it was probably in a US book. The image should be abstract and impartial. It is unacceptable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.80.199.152 ( talk) 18:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
You want another image, make another image. All you have to do is invert the colours! Leushenko ( talk) 03:13, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
There is not universal agreement about wheither a negative afterimage results from adaption of cones; increasingly people are looking at adaption in ganglion cells in the retina and cells in the lateral geniculate nucleus of the brain.-- Heida Maria 14:46, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
I agree with Heida. There is not a single research paper which confirms the whole "retinal burn in" type of theory which this article suggests. There is only one citation to "support" this in the current article. But when this citation's research publication is actually read, it says nothing about any proof for this theory. It merely mentions it as an afterthought and an as suggestion with no evidence whatsoever. Furthermore, there are several afterimage illusions which confound such a theory. For example, viewing a white area surrounded by a colored background leads to an afterimage the size and shape of the white area but with the color of the background. The background does not necessarily take a complementary afterimage color. There is also strong evidence that afterimages are strongly modulated by attentional processes. One such illusion is called something like "afterimage after the image" and can be found by looking that up on the web. This illusion shows how only partial afterimages tend to appear after being cued by an outline which corresponds to the shape of a certain color (sorry for the poor explanation here; please look at it for yourself to see what I mean). If anything, this seems to show that afterimages do not likely occur in the retina itself, but could rather be the effect of feedback inhibition of the cortex to the thalamus at multiple levels, most notably the LGN and pulvinar portions for visual aftereffects. This could also easily be extended to explain other aftereffects (e.g. paradoxical heat in the somatosensory system, "aftertones" in the hearing system (maybe not many know about this one, though), etc.) -- 119.83.246.205 ( talk) 02:31, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Whoops. I wasn't signed in. That last entry was mine. -- Aphidz ( talk) 02:58, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright. If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed, feel free to ask me on my talk page and I'll review it personally. Thanks. --- J.S ( t| c) 07:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry to be negative, but the level of explanation in this article is simplistic in some places and possibly incorrect in others. Dubious statements include:
Perhaps Heida Maria can improve it. She seems to be better up on the literature than I am. Robert P. O'Shea 07:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
The change to Che Guevara as the main image is not exactly any more neutral than the US flag. I propose expanding the gallery with a selection of images, and am wondering if anyone has any ideas for an apolitical image for the article's introduction? The WP logo comes to mind... not sure if that would work. I can't put it to the test on this computer, but will try later. At any rate, more pictures would be good, and none of the current three I think are appropriate for the lead. The flag and portrait are too politically biased and the "Jesus" picture, aside from being totally unencyclopaedic in tone, is also a crappy image (I for one couldn't work it out without looking at the filename). Leushenko ( talk) 19:56, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Because the only way I can noticeably see most of the afterimages is blinking vigorously after having stared at it for about a minute. 97.118.32.250 ( talk) 23:19, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Could you create an article about this artist? [2] [3] I do not know how, thank you-- Thgiled ( talk) 08:39, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Apparently there used to be something here about a " Color dove illusion" because there's a redirect by that name that is still used on a figure in the Opponent process article. Anyone know what became of that? Probably the figure in that article should be changed and the redirect removed, but I figured I'd ask first. 71.197.166.72 ( talk) 07:44, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Don't want to complain, but that afterimage I get from the "Afterimage"-thing is definitely blue on pink rather than blue on maroon.-- 91.180.143.27 ( talk) 15:35, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Any pictures besides the United States flag (with appropriate color substitution) to include in the main Afterimage page??
The inverse U.S. flag is a fairly classic example of the afterimage effect; I've seen it elsewhere. Why do you want to change it?
It is unbelievable the subversiveness of having to fix our eyes on the USA flag. Why not another country? If you saw it, it was probably in a US book. The image should be abstract and impartial. It is unacceptable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.80.199.152 ( talk) 18:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
You want another image, make another image. All you have to do is invert the colours! Leushenko ( talk) 03:13, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
There is not universal agreement about wheither a negative afterimage results from adaption of cones; increasingly people are looking at adaption in ganglion cells in the retina and cells in the lateral geniculate nucleus of the brain.-- Heida Maria 14:46, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
I agree with Heida. There is not a single research paper which confirms the whole "retinal burn in" type of theory which this article suggests. There is only one citation to "support" this in the current article. But when this citation's research publication is actually read, it says nothing about any proof for this theory. It merely mentions it as an afterthought and an as suggestion with no evidence whatsoever. Furthermore, there are several afterimage illusions which confound such a theory. For example, viewing a white area surrounded by a colored background leads to an afterimage the size and shape of the white area but with the color of the background. The background does not necessarily take a complementary afterimage color. There is also strong evidence that afterimages are strongly modulated by attentional processes. One such illusion is called something like "afterimage after the image" and can be found by looking that up on the web. This illusion shows how only partial afterimages tend to appear after being cued by an outline which corresponds to the shape of a certain color (sorry for the poor explanation here; please look at it for yourself to see what I mean). If anything, this seems to show that afterimages do not likely occur in the retina itself, but could rather be the effect of feedback inhibition of the cortex to the thalamus at multiple levels, most notably the LGN and pulvinar portions for visual aftereffects. This could also easily be extended to explain other aftereffects (e.g. paradoxical heat in the somatosensory system, "aftertones" in the hearing system (maybe not many know about this one, though), etc.) -- 119.83.246.205 ( talk) 02:31, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Whoops. I wasn't signed in. That last entry was mine. -- Aphidz ( talk) 02:58, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright. If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed, feel free to ask me on my talk page and I'll review it personally. Thanks. --- J.S ( t| c) 07:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry to be negative, but the level of explanation in this article is simplistic in some places and possibly incorrect in others. Dubious statements include:
Perhaps Heida Maria can improve it. She seems to be better up on the literature than I am. Robert P. O'Shea 07:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
The change to Che Guevara as the main image is not exactly any more neutral than the US flag. I propose expanding the gallery with a selection of images, and am wondering if anyone has any ideas for an apolitical image for the article's introduction? The WP logo comes to mind... not sure if that would work. I can't put it to the test on this computer, but will try later. At any rate, more pictures would be good, and none of the current three I think are appropriate for the lead. The flag and portrait are too politically biased and the "Jesus" picture, aside from being totally unencyclopaedic in tone, is also a crappy image (I for one couldn't work it out without looking at the filename). Leushenko ( talk) 19:56, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Because the only way I can noticeably see most of the afterimages is blinking vigorously after having stared at it for about a minute. 97.118.32.250 ( talk) 23:19, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Could you create an article about this artist? [2] [3] I do not know how, thank you-- Thgiled ( talk) 08:39, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Apparently there used to be something here about a " Color dove illusion" because there's a redirect by that name that is still used on a figure in the Opponent process article. Anyone know what became of that? Probably the figure in that article should be changed and the redirect removed, but I figured I'd ask first. 71.197.166.72 ( talk) 07:44, 3 June 2015 (UTC)