OSA's Digital Library

Journal of the Optical Society of America A

Journal of the Optical Society of America A


  • Vol. 2, Iss. 10 — Oct. 1, 1985
  • pp: 1760–1768

Perceived contrast in the fovea and periphery

Mark W. Cannon, Jr.  »View Author Affiliations

JOSA A, Vol. 2, Issue 10, pp. 1760-1768 (1985)

View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (1339 KB)

Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools



Subjects estimated the perceived contrast of 2°-diameter sine-wave grating patches for spatial frequencies of 2, 4, 8, and 16 cycles/deg, at eccentricities from 0° to 40° and contrasts up to 0.8. The data were well fitted in all cases by power functions of contrast minus threshold, with exponents of the order of 0.5 implying similar mechanisms in both fovea and periphery. The data also demonstrate that, at high physical contrast, the visual system is generally driven toward an operating state in which two stimuli of equal physical contrast have equal perceived contrast even if the thresholds are quite different. As a consequence, peripheral perceived contrasts produced by high physical contrasts show almost no change with eccentricity, whereas thresholds increase by at least an order of magnitude. This implies that mechanisms mediating threshold detection and suprathreshold perception may be different.

© 1985 Optical Society of America

Original Manuscript: January 3, 1985
Manuscript Accepted: June 3, 1985
Published: October 1, 1985

Mark W. Cannon, "Perceived contrast in the fovea and periphery," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 2, 1760-1768 (1985)

Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  


  1. A. Watanabe, T. Mori, S. Nagata, K. Hiwatashi, “Spatial sine-wave responses of the human visual system,” Vision Res. 8, 1245–1263 (1968). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. C. Blakemore, J. P. J. Muncey, R. M. Ridley, “Stimulus specificity in the human visual system,” Vision Res. 13, 195–1931 (1973). [CrossRef]
  3. M. A. Georgeson, G. D. Sullivan, “Contrast constancy: deblurring in human vision by spatial frequency channels,” J. Physiol. (London) 252, 627–656 (1975).
  4. D. O. Bowker, “Suprathreshold spatiotemporal response characteristics of the human visual system,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 73, 426–440 (1983). [CrossRef]
  5. G. E. Legge, “A power law for contrast discrimination,” Vision Res. 21, 457–467 (1981). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. G. E. Legge, J. M. Foley, “Contrast masking in human vision,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 70, 1458–1471 (1980). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. W. H. Swanson, H. R. Wilson, S. C. Giese, “Contrast matching data predicted from contrast increment thresholds,” Vision Res. 24, 63–75 (1984). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. S. S. Stevens, “The direct estimation of sensory magnitudes—loudness,” Am. J. Psychol. 69, 1–25 (1956). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. O. Franzen, M. Berkley, “Apparent contrast as a function of modulation depth and spatial frequency: a comparison between perceptual and electrophysiological measures,” Vision Res. 15, 655–660 (1975). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. J. R. Hamerly, R. F. Quick, T. A. Reichert, “A study of grating contrast judgment,” Vision Res. 17, 201–207 (1977). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. M. W. Cannon, “Contrast sensation: a linear function of stimulus contrast,” Vision Res. 19, 1405–1452 (1979). [CrossRef]
  12. J. Gottesman, G. S. Rubin, G. E. Legge, “A power law for perceived contrast in human vision,” Vision Res. 21, 791–799 (1981). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. M. W. Cannon, “A study of stimulus range effects in free modulus magnitude estimation of contrast,” Vision Res. 24, 1049–1055 (1984). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. M. W. Cannon, “Range effects in magnitude estimation of contrast,” Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. Suppl. 25, 296 (1984).
  15. R. F. Hess, A. Bradley, “Contrast perception above threshold is only minimally impaired in human amblyopia,” Nature 287, 463–464 (1980). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. D. S. Loshin, D. M. Levi, “Suprathreshold contrast perception in functional amblyopia,” Doc. Ophthalmol. 55, 213–236 (1983). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. J. C. Stevens, S. S. Stevens, “Brightness function: effects of adaptation,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 53, 375–385 (1963). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. S. Takahashi, Y. Ejima, “Dependence of apparent contrast of a sinusoidal grating on stimulus size,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 12, 1197–1201 (1984). [CrossRef]
  19. P. M. Daniel, D. Witteridge, “The representation of the visual field in the cerebral cortex in monkey,” J. Physiol. 186, 558–578 (1961).
  20. D. H. Hubel, T. N. Wiesel, “Uniformity of monkey striate cortex. A parallel relationship between field size, scatter, and magnification factor,” J. Comp. Neurol. 158, 295–306 (1974). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. C. Guld, A. Bertulis, “Representation of fovea in the striate cortex of vervet monkey, Cercopithecus aethiops pygerythrus,” Vision Res. 16, 629–631 (1976). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. B. M. Dow, A. Z. Synder, R. B. Vautin, R. Bauer, “Magnification factor and receptive field size in foveal striate cortex of the monkey,” Exp. Brain Res. 44, 213–228 (1981). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. V. Virsu, J. Rovamo, “Visual resolution, contrast sensitivity and the cortical magnification factor,” Exp. Brain Res. 37, 475–494 (1979). [CrossRef]
  24. J. Rovamo, V. Virsu, “An estimation and application of the human cortical magnification factor,” Exp. Brain Res. 37, 495–510 (1979). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

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.

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited