Comments on: the value of movement in personal communication http://purplemotes.net/2010/01/03/the-value-of-movement-in-personal-communication/ a journal of whimsy and hope Mon, 07 May 2012 22:01:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Douglas Galbi http://purplemotes.net/2010/01/03/the-value-of-movement-in-personal-communication/#comment-1382 Douglas Galbi Mon, 04 Jan 2010 02:23:26 +0000 http://purplemotes.net/?p=3058#comment-1382 Anon, consider this: <blockquote>Cunningham and Wallraven reduced the video sequence to the last 16 frames and expanded the static presentation to those sixteen frames temporally sequenced in an over-all image grid. Participants significantly more accurately recognized facial expressions in the dynamic 16-frame presentation than in the static 16-frame grid (roughly 75% to 60%).</blockquote> For more details, read <a href="http://www.journalofvision.org/9/13/7/article.aspx" rel="nofollow">Cunningham and Wallraven</a>. They analyzed in detail the issue that you raise. Anon, consider this:

Cunningham and Wallraven reduced the video sequence to the last 16 frames and expanded the static presentation to those sixteen frames temporally sequenced in an over-all image grid. Participants significantly more accurately recognized facial expressions in the dynamic 16-frame presentation than in the static 16-frame grid (roughly 75% to 60%).

For more details, read Cunningham and Wallraven. They analyzed in detail the issue that you raise.

]]> By: anonymous http://purplemotes.net/2010/01/03/the-value-of-movement-in-personal-communication/#comment-1381 anonymous Sun, 03 Jan 2010 22:55:55 +0000 http://purplemotes.net/?p=3058#comment-1381 The author’s focus on “movement” may be misplaced. Naturally, if one performs an analysis using multiple still images one will obtain a better result that than if one only analysis a single image. All the evidence that the author provides to prove his point about movement, can be explained by merely understanding that the analysis of plural still images will provide a better result than the analysis of a single still image. Focusing on movement implies “rate of change” or in mathematical terms a “derivative”. What the author discusses can be explained by merely focusing on multiple still images. The author gives no evidence that the use of “motion”, that is rate of change or the mathematical derivative provides any benefit. Possible it does, but to understand any such benefit one must examine “motion” as compared to a plurality of still images. The author’s focus on “movement” may be misplaced. Naturally, if one performs an analysis using multiple still images one will obtain a better result that than if one only analysis a single image. All the evidence that the author provides to prove his point about movement, can be explained by merely understanding that the analysis of plural still images will provide a better result than the analysis of a single still image. Focusing on movement implies “rate of change” or in mathematical terms a “derivative”. What the author discusses can be explained by merely focusing on multiple still images. The author gives no evidence that the use of “motion”, that is rate of change or the mathematical derivative provides any benefit. Possible it does, but to understand any such benefit one must examine “motion” as compared to a plurality of still images.

]]>