Quote:
Originally Posted by ApK
I tried to watch some of the video presentation of that course by Novella.
Early on, he presented Bev Doolittle's painting "Pintos" as an example of an "ambiguous stimuli" optical illusion, like the "young/old woman" illusion.
The Pinto paining is NOT an optical illusion, and there is nothing in it that is designed to be ambiguous. It is a straight-up painting of five pintos on a similar looking background. There is nothing that can be interpreted two ways, there is simply some natural camouflage that blends in well, meaning you may have to count horse heads or legs to be sure you didn't miss one.
I could not watch the rest of the material because I decided I could not trust him.
Was I too hasty?
|
I think so. Camouflage and hidden messages in paintings can fall within the realm of optical illusion, I believe. But then again, I've been familiar with Dr. Novella for years from his skeptical panel podcast, The Skeptic's Guide to the Galaxy, and over those years he has gained my trust.