-
-
Replying to @AkiyoshiKitaoka
Looks like it’s a work of art - does copyright count here?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @willjharrison
"Rotating snake" is one of my works. http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/~akitaoka/index-e.html …
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @AkiyoshiKitaoka
I know it well - one of my favourites! I was curious about the technical aspects of "copyright"...
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @willjharrison
No copyright for science including illusion itself. Copyright is given to someone's creations including designs. "Rotating snakes" is one of my creations to show the optimized Fraser-Wilcox illusion. So the MoMa's work violates the copyright of my "Rotating snakes".
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @AkiyoshiKitaoka @willjharrison
Moreover, the MoMA's work does not show the credit of the illusion. The Fraser-Wilcox illusion was proposed by Fraser and Wilcox (1979) and was "optimized" by me in the 2000s (Kitaoka, 2014, 2017).
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @AkiyoshiKitaoka @willjharrison
Fraser, A. and Wilcox, K. J. (1979) Perception of illusory movement. Nature, 281, 565-566. Kitaoka, A. (2014). Color-dependent motion illusions in stationary images and their phenomenal dimorphism. Perception, 43(9), 914-925.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
Kitaoka, A. (2017). The Fraser-Wilcox illusion and its extension. A. G. Shapiro and D. Todorović (Eds.), The Oxford Compendium of Visual Illusions, Oxford University Press, pp. 500-511.pic.twitter.com/eITl93VgM3
-
-
Replying to @AkiyoshiKitaoka
Thanks for the clarification and further information. Good luck with MOMA!
0 replies 0 retweets 3 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.