From video and photography to hyperrealist art, we assume detail functions like a camera's resolution, the more information captured, the closer we get to the thing itself. Detail is the winner when it comes to uncovering reality. But the story is not so straightforward. The brain isn't a camera: predictive processing suggests it builds what we see from what it expects, not by recording the world as it is. Too much detail can make something feel less real: near-perfect CGI faces trigger a sharp drop in affinity right before they become convincing, a reaction known as the uncanny valley. While Rembrandt's late self-portraits are looser and rougher than his polished early work, yet are widely considered more truthful.
Should we abandon the assumption that more detail brings us closer to reality, and instead see detail as a refinement of a particular representation and perspective on the world? Might the assumption that we can uncover reality be itself an illusion? Or is truth in the details, and the closer we look, the more clearly we see?
Should we abandon the assumption that more detail brings us closer to reality, and instead see detail as a refinement of a particular representation and perspective on the world? Might the assumption that we can uncover reality be itself an illusion? Or is truth in the details, and the closer we look, the more clearly we see?
