Oh boy, look up 'sense data' in wikipedia and see all the references to logical positivists! (not that there's anything wrong with that)You and I have different understandings of perception, even see. How about if I substitute sense data for 'actual perceptions'?
I don't like talk of sense data or qualia, in the sense that they are place holders for the speaker's entire theory of perception usually. They're less terms, than hyperlinks to entire philosophies. I realize that my use of 'perception' could have the same problems, but at least it has an ordinary meaning that I think is at least close to how I am using it.
When I say that I see an eclair, not first a patch of colors, then an eclair - I am basically rejecting 'sense data' as a meaningful concept in talk of perception. I don't see any reason to suppose that I somehow see a 'sense data,' then process it into a completed perception. I think it is only meaningful to say that I 'just' see an eclair.
So in a sense, yes, knowledge changes sense data as I think you use the terms. But sense data in my mind (so to speak) is not half the story (raw material to be molded into something else by the mind or brain).
I think I could say 'consciousness' when I say 'perception' and would probably mean the same thing. But I have to think about that.