02-07-2007, 10:10 PM
One thing that always baffled me about the "eyes/faces" tests that involve celebrities is that these tests are highly dependent on how you *know* those celebrities in the first place, right?
In my case, the only way I even know of these celebrities (as in being able to put a name -because I read it spelled out - to the concept of them as a person, e.g. picture, description etc) is from quick glimpses of shots of mostly their profiles, in TV magazines and newspapers etc.
When I see those people in films, I don't recognise them unless I recognise their name (written on the poster), or their voice.
But because I only ever learned about these people from reading (accidentally more or less, I read loads and although I loathe scene and celebrity magazines if there is nothing else to read I just read them anyway, it's mechanical and automatic) their names matched up with close-ups of their faces, that is the *only* way I can recognise them in the first place!
If you showed me the person in a film I wouldn't recognise them because when they play a different character their overall presentation (if they are a good actor) makes them a different person to me. But their face, if I have come across it (on its own so to say, just the head/face on a close-up in a paper or magazine), is a concept I will remember.
'Real' people on the other hand I only know as a whole person, so their faces and eyes just don't mean anything.... basically with 'famous' people if I know them at all I only know them *as* those faces in the first place... so it really doesn't compare to recognising real people...
Does this make sense?
In my case, the only way I even know of these celebrities (as in being able to put a name -because I read it spelled out - to the concept of them as a person, e.g. picture, description etc) is from quick glimpses of shots of mostly their profiles, in TV magazines and newspapers etc.
When I see those people in films, I don't recognise them unless I recognise their name (written on the poster), or their voice.
But because I only ever learned about these people from reading (accidentally more or less, I read loads and although I loathe scene and celebrity magazines if there is nothing else to read I just read them anyway, it's mechanical and automatic) their names matched up with close-ups of their faces, that is the *only* way I can recognise them in the first place!
If you showed me the person in a film I wouldn't recognise them because when they play a different character their overall presentation (if they are a good actor) makes them a different person to me. But their face, if I have come across it (on its own so to say, just the head/face on a close-up in a paper or magazine), is a concept I will remember.
'Real' people on the other hand I only know as a whole person, so their faces and eyes just don't mean anything.... basically with 'famous' people if I know them at all I only know them *as* those faces in the first place... so it really doesn't compare to recognising real people...
Does this make sense?