OSA's Digital Library

Journal of the Optical Society of America A

Journal of the Optical Society of America A

| OPTICS, IMAGE SCIENCE, AND VISION

  • Vol. 19, Iss. 3 — Mar. 1, 2002
  • pp: 425–435

Ratio model serves suprathreshold color—luminance discrimination

Marcel J. Sankeralli, Kathy T. Mullen, and Trevor J. Hine  »View Author Affiliations


JOSA A, Vol. 19, Issue 3, pp. 425-435 (2002)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/JOSAA.19.000425


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (474 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

We extended earlier results [J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 16, 2625 (1999)] to examine how the responses of the three postreceptoral mechanisms are combined to subserve discrimination of suprathreshold stimuli. Test thresholds were obtained in the presence of suprathreshold pedestals selected in different quadrants of the red–green/luminance and blue–yellow/luminance planes of cardinal color space. We showed that (1) test threshold was directly proportional to pedestal contrast for pedestal contrasts exceeding five times pedestal contrast threshold, and (2) there were exceptions to this proportionality, notably when the test and pedestal directions were fixed in the cardinal directions. Results support a ratio model of suprathreshold color–luminance discrimination, in which discrimination depends on a ratio of outputs of the postreceptoral mechanisms. We also observed that when test threshold was measured as a function of test color-space direction, masking by the achromatic component of the pedestal was less than that by the chromatic component. In addition, masking by a dark (negative luminance component) pedestal was lower than masking by a light (positive luminance) pedestal of a similar contrast. Our results demonstrated that (1) there is no fundamental difference between discrimination in the isoluminant and in the two chromoluminant cardinal planes, (2) there exists the possibility that discrimination in cardinal directions differs from that in noncardinal (intermediate) directions, and (3) suprathreshold discrimination of luminance differences may be more sensitive than that of chromatic differences for a given suprathreshold pedestal.

© 2002 Optical Society of America

OCIS Codes
(330.0330) Vision, color, and visual optics : Vision, color, and visual optics
(330.1720) Vision, color, and visual optics : Color vision
(330.1800) Vision, color, and visual optics : Vision - contrast sensitivity

Citation
Marcel J. Sankeralli, Kathy T. Mullen, and Trevor J. Hine, "Ratio model serves suprathreshold color—luminance discrimination," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 19, 425-435 (2002)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/josaa/abstract.cfm?URI=josaa-19-3-425


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset

References

  1. M. Gur and V. Akri, “Isoluminant stimuli may not expose the full contribution of color to visual functioning: spatial contrast sensitivity measurements indicate interaction between color and luminance processing,” Vision Res. 32, 1253–1262 (1993).
  2. K. T. Mullen and M. J. Sankeralli, “Evidence for the stochastic independence of the blue–yellow, red–green and luminance detection mechanisms revealed by subthreshold summation,” Vision Res. 39, 733–743 (1999).
  3. E. Switkes, A. Bradley, and K. K. Devalois, “Contrast dependence and mechanisms of masking interactions among chromatic and luminance gratings,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 5, 1149–1162 (1988).
  4. G. R. Cole, T. J. Hine, and W. H. MacIlhagga, “Estimation of linear detection mechanisms for stimuli of medium spatial frequency,” Vision Res. 34, 1267–1278 (1994).
  5. C.-C. Chen, J. M. Foley, and D. H. Brainard, “Detection of chromoluminance patterns on chromoluminance pedestals I: threshold measurements,” Vision Res. 40, 773–788 (2000).
  6. C.-C. Chen, J. M. Foley, and D. H. Brainard, “Detection of chromoluminance patterns on chromoluminance pedestals I: model,” Vision Res. 40, 789–803 (2000).
  7. B. A. Wandell, “Colour measurement and discrimination,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 2, 62–71 (1989).
  8. M. J. Sankeralli and K. T. Mullen, “Ratio model for suprathreshold hue-increment detection,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 16, 2625–2637 (1999).
  9. J. Krauskopf, D. R. Williams, and D. W. Heeley, “Cardinal directions of colour space,” Vision Res. 22, 1123–1131 (1982).
  10. A. M. Derrington, J. Krauskopf, and P. Lennie, “Chromatic mechanisms in lateral geniculate nucleus of macaque,” J. Physiol. (London) 357, 241–265 (1984).
  11. W. H. Press, S. A. Teukolsky, W. T. Vetterling, and B. P. Flannery, Numerical Recipes in C: The Art of Scientific Computing, 2nd ed. (Cambridge U. Press, Cambridge, UK, 1992).
  12. The elliptical model presupposes that in the presence of a suprathreshold noncardinal pedestal, test threshold is determined by two distinct mechanisms: one detecting the test component parallel to the pedestal color direction (a contrast increment), the other detecting the component perpendicular to this direction (a hue increment). Our previous results supported this separation, at least for the isoluminant plane.8
  13. In the single-variable, two-treatment analysis of variance (t test), the difference of the means of the two treatments was compared with the 95% acceptability level of the t parameter given the number of trials involved per treatment.
  14. To determine whether the parameter Δ is constant within each plane, we performed a chi-squared test of the error across treatments (MST) compared with the error within each measurement (MSE). This analysis did not include data from the cardinal pedestal directions. MST is given by the standard error of the fitted mean Δ’s; MSE is calculated from the width W of the 95% confidence interval for each fitted Δ: MSE =mean {(W/2)/tα/2 }, where tα/2 is the t statistic at α/2=0.025. The quantity χ2 =MST/MSE was used to compute a Q value—the probability that the variability in Δ could be accounted for by a random measurement variability. As in the main test, the variation in Δ was accepted as random (as opposed to a systematic departure from uniformity) if Q>0.1.
  15. It is possible that this pedestal direction lies near the actual “blue” cardinal pole for this subject.
  16. M. J. Sankeralli and K. T. Mullen, “Assumptions concerning orthogonality in threshold-scaled versus cone-contrast colour spaces,” Vision Res. 41, 53–55 (2001).
  17. G. R. Cole, C. F. Stromeyer III, and R. E. Kronauer, “Visual interactions with luminance and chromatic stimuli,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 7, 128–140 (1990).
  18. K. T. Mullen and M. A. Losada, “Evidence for separate pathways for color and luminance detection mechanisms,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 11, 3136–3151 (1994).
  19. M. J. Sankeralli and K. T. Mullen, “Postreceptoral chromatic detection mechanisms revealed by noise masking in three-dimensional cone contrast space,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 14, 2633–2646 (1997).
  20. J. Krauskopf, D. R. Williams, M. B. Mandler, and A. M. Brown, “Higher order colour mechanisms,” Vision Res. 26, 23–32 (1986).
  21. M. D. Zmura, “Color in visual search,” Vision Res. 31, 951–966 (1991).
  22. J. Krauskopf, H.-J. Wu, and B. Farrell, “Coherence, cardinal directions and higher-order mechanisms,” Vision Res. 36, 1235–1245 (1996).

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