they are seeing. A straight picture of a cow in a field is relatively easy to parse, but a complex photo with perspective and multiple subject is tougher. Is this really believable? On seeing a picture of a person: "It looks like an aeroplane... these [the legs] look like aeroplane wings. This looks like a man's head. Those look like his legs. It's a man." Is this really believable? On seeing a picture of a person: "It looks like an aeroplane... these [the legs] look like aeroplane wings. This looks like a man's head. Those look like his legs. It's a man." Mistaking a man for an airplane? The movie At First Sight starring Val Kilmer is based on actual events. It's the story of a man who has been blind from birth and has his sight restored by surgery. He has to learn how to see. How to make sense of all the sudden visual information. This demonstrates that seeing, something we think of as an automatic result of proper eye function, is something we learn. He also had to learn that a picture of an apple and a real apple are not the same thing. A friend of mine once related some information he discovered that primitive people could not initially see the image on a TV screen. They had to learn that it represented an image. At the time I thought "bullshit". But now, after encountering other similar accounts, like the one mentioned here, I have to