Skip to main content
Notice removed Reward existing answer by user22020
Bounty Ended with anongoodnurse's answer chosen by CommunityBot
Notice added Reward existing answer by user22020
Bounty Started worth 500 reputation by CommunityBot
deleted 1 character in body
Source Link
AliceD
  • 52.6k
  • 19
  • 176
  • 241

For me it seems reasonable that if I kept my gaze on a fixed point in a room with low light, a progressively brighter and better picture would appear before my eyes, just like a camera can see in the dark if the shutter speeedspeed is really slow, e.g. 4 seconds exposure. Why can't our brain do this trick as well (accumulate visual information over time)? Or is it a limitation of the eyes?

edit:

To further clarify what I'm after; I will show a concrete example from the world of photography (images taken from this website).

Here is an example where we have a series of underexposed images - this would be what the brain receives: Series of under exposed images

Now, combining all of them with a simple add-operation reveals one image that has normal exposure. Sum of all images equals one normal exposed image

This seems like a simple trick for our powerful brain - surely it can add incoming signals?

For me it seems reasonable that if I kept my gaze on a fixed point in a room with low light, a progressively brighter and better picture would appear before my eyes, just like a camera can see in the dark if the shutter speeed is really slow, e.g. 4 seconds exposure. Why can't our brain do this trick as well (accumulate visual information over time)? Or is it a limitation of the eyes?

edit:

To further clarify what I'm after; I will show a concrete example from the world of photography (images taken from this website).

Here is an example where we have a series of underexposed images - this would be what the brain receives: Series of under exposed images

Now, combining all of them with a simple add-operation reveals one image that has normal exposure. Sum of all images equals one normal exposed image

This seems like a simple trick for our powerful brain - surely it can add incoming signals?

For me it seems reasonable that if I kept my gaze on a fixed point in a room with low light, a progressively brighter and better picture would appear before my eyes, just like a camera can see in the dark if the shutter speed is really slow, e.g. 4 seconds exposure. Why can't our brain do this trick as well (accumulate visual information over time)? Or is it a limitation of the eyes?

edit:

To further clarify what I'm after; I will show a concrete example from the world of photography (images taken from this website).

Here is an example where we have a series of underexposed images - this would be what the brain receives: Series of under exposed images

Now, combining all of them with a simple add-operation reveals one image that has normal exposure. Sum of all images equals one normal exposed image

This seems like a simple trick for our powerful brain - surely it can add incoming signals?

edited tags
Link
AliceD
  • 52.6k
  • 19
  • 176
  • 241
Tweeted twitter.com/StackBiology/status/696513148380176384
added 759 characters in body
Source Link
filip
  • 369
  • 3
  • 7

For me it seems reasonable that if I kept my gaze on a fixed point in a room with low light, a progressively brighter and better picture would appear before my eyes, just like a camera can see in the dark if the shutter speeed is really slow, e.g. 4 seconds exposure. Why can't our brain do this trick as well (accumulate visual information over time)? Or is it a limitation of the eyes?

edit:

To further clarify what I'm after; I will show a concrete example from the world of photography (images taken from this website).

Here is an example where we have a series of underexposed images - this would be what the brain receives: Series of under exposed images

Now, combining all of them with a simple add-operation reveals one image that has normal exposure. Sum of all images equals one normal exposed image

This seems like a simple trick for our powerful brain - surely it can add incoming signals?

For me it seems reasonable that if I kept my gaze on a fixed point in a room with low light, a progressively brighter and better picture would appear before my eyes, just like a camera can see in the dark if the shutter speeed is really slow, e.g. 4 seconds exposure. Why can't our brain do this trick as well (accumulate visual information over time)? Or is it a limitation of the eyes?

For me it seems reasonable that if I kept my gaze on a fixed point in a room with low light, a progressively brighter and better picture would appear before my eyes, just like a camera can see in the dark if the shutter speeed is really slow, e.g. 4 seconds exposure. Why can't our brain do this trick as well (accumulate visual information over time)? Or is it a limitation of the eyes?

edit:

To further clarify what I'm after; I will show a concrete example from the world of photography (images taken from this website).

Here is an example where we have a series of underexposed images - this would be what the brain receives: Series of under exposed images

Now, combining all of them with a simple add-operation reveals one image that has normal exposure. Sum of all images equals one normal exposed image

This seems like a simple trick for our powerful brain - surely it can add incoming signals?

tried to clarify even more
Source Link
filip
  • 369
  • 3
  • 7
Loading
clarified light conditions
Source Link
filip
  • 369
  • 3
  • 7
Loading
Source Link
filip
  • 369
  • 3
  • 7
Loading