Computer vision and human vision differ in interesting ways. While human vision is natural and intuitive, allowing us to recognize patterns and emotions effortlessly, computers need specific algorithms to make sense of images. For instance, what we instantly understand as motion or objects, computers detect through methods like frame differencing or background subtraction. I honestly find it intresting how rigid and task-specific computer vision is compared to our flexibility. Furthermore, to help computers “see” what we want, it uses techniques like brightness thresholding or background subtraction, and sometimes adjusts the physical environment by using better lighting or reflective markers.
Moreover, in interactive art, computer vision creates exciting new opportunities but also brings up ethical questions. For instance, Videoplace used computer vision to create playful, full-body interactions, while Standards and Double Standards used it to explore themes of authority and surveillance. However, a question that popped into my mind is that, when you consider the ability of these systems to track movements and gestures, do you feel like the line between creative interaction and surveillance can sometimes blur? This reminded me of the movie M3GAN, where AI uses computer vision to care for a child, but the surveillance becomes invasive. What if we might see something similar with interactive art or technology, where the systems that are meant to engage us could start to feel more like surveillance. Hence, it’s an interesting balance between enhancing the experience but also respecting privacy.
Skip to content
