Notices
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Photographic memory

  1. #1 Photographic memory 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    8
    Does anyone here have (really good) photographic memory? I'm really interested about it, but don't seem to find the answers I'm looking for. First of all I'd like to know what happens if a person with photographic memory looks at a page in a book in a way that eyes are closed before the book is opened and then only opened for a moment, while the eyes are not moved. In other words, if a page is seen at once, not moving the eyes at all - what will the result be?

    Can the whole page be remembered perfectly?

    (What would be a more suitable site/forum for this question if this is not the best place?)


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,376
    Everyone has a photographic memory. It's just that some people are out of film.


    Seriously.... I can sometimes remember things on a page if I think about something like a notebook and the page I noted something. Thinking about the order things appear in the text I wrote can jog my memory and come up with answers on a test. Its far from perfect, but it helps if I use black pen for the text and a blue for the key terms when note-taking.

    I can also jog memory by thinking about the position of terms in a page or slides a professor or manager displayed at school or work.

    My memory is far from photographic, though and the results are often mixed.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Niagara Region, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    26
    I think that perhaps what jimhoyle is referring to is more properly called Eidetic memory. Certain very few individuals (and many savants) can, at will, literally 'memorize' perfectly anything viewed. As SkinWalker noted, we all have this ability to one degree or another, but the few with true Eidetic capabilities are rare in extremis.

    http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neur...2/Arnaudo.html
    "Wherever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    8
    I've been reading some stuff about the workings of memory.. What I'd now like to really find is a person that would have an accurate "photographic" memory. The number one question for me is about that eye movement thing. I'd like to know if it's possible without moving the eyes and looking at the details with the foveal vision. In other words, does peripheral vision actually have very high resolution, but foveal vision just is normally perceived more detailed due to brain processing and attention focus (even there is a higher density of receptors in the fovea)?

    A good place to ask about this might be the Photoreading forum, but I don't want to mix this with people from there, it'd be great to find just an ordinary person with no "special abilities" except photographic memory.

    Do the savants scan their eyes through the images to be remembered or is a short glance without moving the eyes enough (where the image would be something like 90 degrees wide and tall for example, while the whole horizontal range is about 180 degrees)?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Professor wallaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,521
    i have a reasonably good memory but it is far from photographic.

    when i'm doing an exam and i come across a question i try to remember where i read the information in my text book, in the hopes of jogging my memory. but thats all it really is thinking back to where you found out this information, i guess people with a photographic memory can just remember these things and peice together and image of the page.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    I recall reading in detail of some research on this a long time ago - unfortunately I have no recollection of where. (All forms of memory have let me down on this occasion.)
    The gist of the research was that (At least from the sample studied) photogrpahic memory did not exist. Everyone had the ability to recall the broad structure of what they had read/seen, but the details were not remembered accurately. Even those individuals who had excellent memories and believed these to be photographic were not capturing an accurate-in-detail record of what they saw.
    It would be more accurate to call it a visual memory, but it is more akin to an impressionist painting than to a photograph.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,788
    Posted by Pennywise on Thursday October 02, @11:52PM
    from the flashbulb-not-included dept.
    Barry Gordon wants to set the record streight -- there's no such thing as photographic memory. While some people may have better memories than others, especially when restricted to specific activities, nobody has a flawless memory. This article talks at length about the common conceptions of what photographic memory is and where the concept comes from. Probably the most prevelent contributing concept to photographic memory is that of eidetic imagery -- a condition found mostly in children that allows them to study a picture for 30 seconds and recall it with few mistakes.

    http://cognews.com/1065163951/index_html



    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
    (Redirected from Photographic memory)
    Photographic memory, eidetic memory, or total recall, is the ability to recall images, sounds, or objects in memory with great accuracy and in seemingly unlimited volume.

    It is said that many famous artists and composers, like Claude Monet and Mozart, possibly had eidetic memory. However, Dr. Marvin Minsky, in his book The Society of Mind, claims to have been unable to verify claims of eidetic memory (see sections 15.3 & 15.6) and considers reports of eidetic memory to be an "unfounded myth".

    The Guinness Book of Records nevertheless lists people with extraordinary memories. For example, Hideaki Tomoyori correctly recited the first 40,000 decimals of pi in March 1987, and on November 3, 1994, Tom Groves memorized the order of cards in a randomly shuffled 52-card deck in 42.01 seconds.

    Mathematician John von Neumann is said to have had total recall. The late Stu Ungar, one of the world's most successful poker and gin rummy players, had a similar (and profitable) gift, as did chess genius Bobby Fischer.

    There have been some cases where young children have demonstrated the ability to focus on a picture and then recall it with perfect clarity minutes later. However, these skills are usually lost as they grow older.

    Many believe that some autistics display this ability, as well as those with similar conditions like Asperger's syndrome.

    Autistic savants are a rarity but they, in particular, show signs of spectacular memory; one notable example is Kim Peek, who can recall about 9600 books from memory.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    29
    A total recall is possible, since memory can't be lost. The eye of the mind merely becomes dull.

    I recall memory being held to three major components.

    Association, interaction, visualisation.

    We all have these in a certain degree, which actually creates the theorie that it is actually possible for a (relative) dull mind to attain a perfect memory.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    athens, oh
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Ravendell
    A total recall is possible, since memory can't be lost. The eye of the mind merely becomes dull.

    I recall memory being held to three major components.

    Association, interaction, visualisation.

    We all have these in a certain degree, which actually creates the theorie that it is actually possible for a (relative) dull mind to attain a perfect memory.
    Memory can't be lost? Source?

    This is speculative, but I think one of our advantages over computers is that we do not represent things (think of memories as representations of stimulus input) photographically, which would be very inefficient.

    Not relevant, but interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayumu_(chimpanzee)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by cornsail
    Quote Originally Posted by Ravendell
    A total recall is possible, since memory can't be lost. The eye of the mind merely becomes dull.

    I recall memory being held to three major components.

    Association, interaction, visualisation.

    We all have these in a certain degree, which actually creates the theorie that it is actually possible for a (relative) dull mind to attain a perfect memory.
    Memory can't be lost? Source?

    This is speculative, but I think one of our advantages over computers is that we do not represent things (think of memories as representations of stimulus input) photographically, which would be very inefficient.

    Not relevant, but interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayumu_(chimpanzee)
    The human brain capacity is beyond the current life cycle. Because you can't recall a memory doesn't mean its not there.

    It stays speculative on my side though, no source for the theorie.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •