>> ^westy:
i don't think this is much of an optical illusion.
no more so than say depth in a 2d drawing is an optical illusion or an animation is an optical illusion.
This works by masking off parts of the image by moving the grid you are unmasking a new part of the image. in itself this process is not confusing the brain. there is no optical illusion in the masking process (you brain is not confusing the data in anny way it is reporting what it can see correctly),
the ilissoin is in the animation and the 3d drawings , both of which are so common that we don't refer to them as illusion's.

still the first time I sore this in a kids book I was sat there fiddling with it for couple of minuets working out how it worked.


I tend to agree with this, and it never ceases to amaze me how you can make these relatively long posts with one or two minor typos, and make your short posts look like absolute dyslectic gibberish.

I have no trouble accepting dyslexia, and I do actually read your posts as if the typing didn't matter, but posts like this makes me wonder if you are faking it somehow.

i don't think this is much of an optical illusion.

no more so than say depth in a 2d drawing is an optical illusion or an animation is an optical illusion.

This works by masking off parts of the image by moving the grid you are unmasking a new part of the image. in itself this process is not confusing the brain. there is no optical illusion in the masking process (you brain is not confusing the data in anny way it is reporting what it can see correctly),

the ilissoin is in the animation and the 3d drawings , both of which are so common that we don't refer to them as illusion's.


still the first time I sore this in a kids book I was sat there fiddling with it for couple of minuets working out how it worked.