Per my post on secrets to author gender, now revealed! I realized that I didn't give any mention to the biggest impact on our perception of height/weight ratios: film.
( It's said the camera adds fifteen pounds... )
ETA 3/27: visual explanation
Our depth perception allows us to see an object in 3-D, but -- and this is just my theory, and may be utterly hogwash -- but what I think is going on is that a film camera has enough depth-of-field and is far enough away that it gives 'sharpness' to the edges (the shaded parts in the top two blocks) while our eyes would see those edges as being 'farther away'. The camera flattens the image, in a similar manner to a telephoto lens, if not quite that exaggerated, and thus you see 'more' of the object. It's not quite a barrel distortion so much as the camera overriding our usual perception of, and dismissal of, the 'side view' parts as not being part of the 'front view'.
When you look at the left picture, you know it's 3-D thanks to the shading, but you also know the 'shadow' indicates the object's depth and not its actual width. I think the film-camera removes this blurriness and thus makes the depth look like it's part of the width (the picture on the right). That's my theory, at least.
( It's said the camera adds fifteen pounds... )
ETA 3/27: visual explanation
Our depth perception allows us to see an object in 3-D, but -- and this is just my theory, and may be utterly hogwash -- but what I think is going on is that a film camera has enough depth-of-field and is far enough away that it gives 'sharpness' to the edges (the shaded parts in the top two blocks) while our eyes would see those edges as being 'farther away'. The camera flattens the image, in a similar manner to a telephoto lens, if not quite that exaggerated, and thus you see 'more' of the object. It's not quite a barrel distortion so much as the camera overriding our usual perception of, and dismissal of, the 'side view' parts as not being part of the 'front view'.
When you look at the left picture, you know it's 3-D thanks to the shading, but you also know the 'shadow' indicates the object's depth and not its actual width. I think the film-camera removes this blurriness and thus makes the depth look like it's part of the width (the picture on the right). That's my theory, at least.