OSA's Digital Library

Journal of the Optical Society of America A

Journal of the Optical Society of America A


  • Vol. 16, Iss. 4 — Apr. 1, 1999
  • pp: 793–803

Surround articulation. I. Brightness judgments

James A. Schirillo  »View Author Affiliations

JOSA A, Vol. 16, Issue 4, pp. 793-803 (1999)

View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (499 KB)

Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools



It has been hypothesized that brightness judgments require an estimate of the illuminant. Making this estimate is difficult since luminance edges can be the result of changes in either illumination or reflectance. Articulation is the addition of equally spaced incremental and decremental patches within a surround while preserving the surround’s space-average luminance. It is proposed that articulation enhances the inference that the surround’s luminance edge is due to a change in illumination rather than in reflectance. Articulation results in a corresponding shift in brightness judgments for test-patch increments but not for decrements. This finding concurs with Arend and Goldstein’s [J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 4, 2281 (1987)] reported shifts in brightness as simple center-surround stimuli are transformed into more complex ecologically valid Mondrians.

© 1999 Optical Society of America

OCIS Codes
(330.0330) Vision, color, and visual optics : Vision, color, and visual optics
(330.1690) Vision, color, and visual optics : Color
(330.1720) Vision, color, and visual optics : Color vision

James A. Schirillo, "Surround articulation. I. Brightness judgments," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 16, 793-803 (1999)

Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset


  1. S. K. Shevell, “On neural signals that mediate brightness,” Vision Res. 26, 1195–1208 (1986).
  2. P. Whittle and P. D. C. Challands, “The effect of background luminance on the brightness of flashes,” Vision Res. 9, 1095–1110 (1969).
  3. J. A. Schirillo and S. K. Shevell, “Brightness contrast from inhomogeneous surrounds,” Vision Res. 36, 1783–1796 (1996).
  4. W. Burzlaff, “Methodologische beitrage zum Problem der Farbenkonstanz,” Z. Psychol. 119, 117–235 (1931).
  5. J. Cataliotti and A. Gilchrist, “Local and global processes in surface lightness perception,” Percept. Psychophys. 57, 125–135 (1995).
  6. L. E. Arend and R. Goldstein, “Simultaneous constancy, lightness, and brightness,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 4, 2281–2285 (1987).
  7. L. E. Arend and B. Spehar, “Lightness, brightness, and brightness contrast: 1. Illuminance variation,” Percept. Psychophys. 54, 446–456 (1993).
  8. A. L. Gilchrist, S. Delman, and A. Jacobsen, “The classification and integration of edges as critical to the perception of reflectance and illumination,” Percept. Psychophys. 33, 425–436 (1983).
  9. L. E. Arend and B. Spehar, “Lightness, brightness, and brightness contrast: 2. Reflectance variation,” Percept. Psychophys. 54, 457–468 (1993).
  10. J. A. Schirillo and S. K. Shevell, “Lightness and brightness judgments of coplanar retinally noncontiguous surfaces,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 10, 2442–2452 (1993).
  11. J. A. Schirillo and S. K. Shevell, “An account of brightness in complex scenes based on inferred illumination,” Perception 26, 507–518 (1997).
  12. C. Chubb, G. Sperling, and J. A. Solomon, “Texture interactions determine perceived contrast,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86, 9631–9635 (1989).
  13. F. Kingdom, “Simultaneous contrast: the legacies of Hering and Helmholtz,” Perception 26, 673–677 (1997).
  14. H. Helson, Adaptation-Level Theory (Harper & Row, New York, 1964).
  15. H. W. Horeman, “Inductive brightness depression as influenced by configurational conditions,” Vision Res. 3, 121–130 (1963).
  16. A. F. Rossi, C. D. Rittenhouse, and M. A. Paradiso, “The representation of brightness in primary visual cortex,” Science 273, 1104–1107 (1996).
  17. A. L. Gilchrist, “Lightness contrast and failures of constancy: a common explanation,” Percept. Psychophys. 43, 415–424 (1988).
  18. P. Whittle, “Brightness, discriminability and the ‘crispening effect’,” Vision Res. 32, 1493–1507 (1992).
  19. P. Whittle, “The psychophysics of contrast brightness,” in Lightness, Brightness, and Transparency, A. L. Gilchrist, ed. (Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J., 1994), pp. 35–110.
  20. H. Helson, “Some factors and implications of color constancy,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 33, 555–567 (1943).
  21. R. Evans, “Variables of perceived color,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 54, 1467–1474 (1964).
  22. D. Jameson and L. Hurvich, “Complexities of perceived brightness,” Science 133, 174–179 (1961).
  23. J. Hochberg and A. Silverstein, “A quantitative index of stimulus-similarity proximity vs. differences in brightness,” Am. J. Psychol. 69, 456–458 (1956).
  24. K. Noguchi and A. Kozaki, “Perceptual scission of surface-lightness and illumination: an examination of the Gelb effect,” Psychol. Res. 47, 19–25 (1985).
  25. J. A. Schirillo, “Surround articulation. II. Lightness judgments,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 16, 804–811 (1999).

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.

Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited