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

  • Editor: Franco Gori
  • Vol. 31, Iss. 4 — Apr. 1, 2014
  • pp: A34–A37

Counterphase modulation photometry: comparison of two instruments

Helen Le Sueur, John D. Mollon, Jeroen Granzier, and Gabriele Jordan  »View Author Affiliations


JOSA A, Vol. 31, Issue 4, pp. A34-A37 (2014)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/JOSAA.31.000A34


View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (207 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

The ratio of long-wavelength to medium-wavelength sensitive cones varies significantly among people. In order to investigate the possible effect of this variation in large numbers of participants, a quick and efficient method to estimate the ratio is required. The OSCAR test has been utilized previously for this purpose, but it is no longer available commercially. Having access to one of the few remaining OSCAR instruments, we compared the observers’ mean settings to those obtained with the Medmont C100, a newer but apparently similar device. We also obtained Rayleigh matches for each participant. One hundred volunteers took part in the study. Settings on the OSCAR test were highly correlated with those on the Medmont C100. Both tests appeared to be influenced not only by LM cone ratios but also by the spectral positions of the cone photopigments, since anomaloscope midmatch points accounted for a significant proportion of the variance. We conclude that the Medmont C100 can be used as a suitable replacement for the OSCAR test and has a role in the rapid estimation of LM cone ratios.

© 2013 Optical Society of America

OCIS Codes
(330.0330) Vision, color, and visual optics : Vision, color, and visual optics
(330.5310) Vision, color, and visual optics : Vision - photoreceptors
(330.5510) Vision, color, and visual optics : Psychophysics

ToC Category:
Color sensitivity and appearance

History
Original Manuscript: October 4, 2013
Manuscript Accepted: November 1, 2013
Published: December 19, 2013

Virtual Issues
Vol. 9, Iss. 6 Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

Citation
Helen Le Sueur, John D. Mollon, Jeroen Granzier, and Gabriele Jordan, "Counterphase modulation photometry: comparison of two instruments," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 31, A34-A37 (2014)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/josaa/abstract.cfm?URI=josaa-31-4-A34


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. Hl. de Vries, “The heredity of the relative numbers of red and green receptors in the human eye,” Genetica 24, 199–212 (1949). [CrossRef]
  2. G. H. Jacobs and J. Neitz, “Electrophysiological estimates of individual variation in the L/M cone ratio,” in Color Vision Deficiencies XI, B. Drum, ed. (Kluwer Academic, 1993), pp. 107–112.
  3. J. Kremers, H. P. N. Scholl, H. Knau, T. T. J. M. Berendschot, T. Usui, and L. T. Sharpe, “L/M cone ratios in human trichromats assessed by psychophysics, electroretinography, and retinal densitometry,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 17, 517–526 (2000). [CrossRef]
  4. J. Carroll, J. Neitz, and M. Neitz, “Estimates of L∶M cone ratio from ERG flicker photometry and genetics,” J. Vis. 2(8):1, 531–542 (2002). [CrossRef]
  5. J. K. Bowmaker, J. W. L. Parry, and J. D. Mollon, “The arrangement of L and M cones in human and primate retina,” in Normal and Defective Colour Vision, J. D. Mollon, J. Pokorny, and K. Knoblauch, eds. (Oxford University, 2003), pp. 39–50.
  6. H. Hofer, J. Carroll, J. Neitz, M. Neitz, and D. R. Williams, “Organization of the human trichromatic cone mosaic,” J. Neurosci. 25, 9669–9679 (2005). [CrossRef]
  7. M. L. Bieber, J. M. Kraft, and J. S. Werner, “Effects of known variations in photopigments on L/M cone ratios estimated from luminous efficiency functions,” Vis. Res. 38, 1961–1966 (1998). [CrossRef]
  8. K. L. Gunther, J. Neitz, and M. Neitz, “Nucleotide polymorphisms upstream of the X-chromosome opsin gene array tune L∶M cone ratio,” Vis. Neurosci. 25, 265–271 (2008). [CrossRef]
  9. S. S. Deeb, “The molecular basis of variation in human color vision,” Clin. Genet. 67, 369–377 (2005). [CrossRef]
  10. S. M. Hood, J. D. Mollon, L. Purves, and G. Jordan, “Color discrimination in carriers of color deficiency,” Vis. Res. 46, 2894–2900 (2006). [CrossRef]
  11. O. Estévez, H. Spekreijse, J. T. W. Van Dalen, and H. F. E. Verduyn Lunel, “The OSCAR color vision test: theory and evaluation (objective screening of color anomalies and reductions),” Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 60, 892–901 (1983). [CrossRef]
  12. G. Verriest and A. Uvijls, “Results of the OSCAR test in groups of normal and abnormal subjects,” in Colour Vision Deficiencies IX, B. Drum and G. Verriest, eds. (Kluwer Academic, 1988), pp. 479–485.
  13. G. Jordan and J. D. Mollon, “Sons and mothers: classification of colour-deficient and heterozygous subjects by counterphase modulation photometry,” in Colour Vision Deficiencies XIII, C. R. Cavonius, ed. (Kluwer Academic, 1997), pp. 385–392.
  14. M. V. Danilova, C. H. Chan, and J. D. Mollon, “Can spatial resolution reveal individual differences in the L∶M cone ratio?” Vis. Res., 78, 26–38 (2013). [CrossRef]
  15. F. Zisman, K. R. Seger, and A. J. Adams, “Specificity evaluation of the OSCAR color vision test,” in Colour Vision Deficiencies VIII, G. Verriest, ed. (W. Junk Publishers, 1987), pp. 173–176.
  16. A. J. Lawrance-Owen, J. M. Bosten, R. E. Hogg, G. Bargary, P. T. Goodbourn, and J. D. Mollon, “Counterphase flicker photometry: population results for a clinical test,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A. (submitted).
  17. A. B. Metha and A. J. Vingrys, “The C-100: a new dichotomiser of colour vision defectives,” Clin. Exp. Optom. 75, 114–123 (1992). [CrossRef]
  18. R. W. Harris and B. L. Cole, “Diagnosing protan heterozygosity using the Medmont C-100 colour vision test,” Clin. Exp. Optom. 88, 240–247 (2005). [CrossRef]
  19. W. A. H. Rushton and H. D. Baker, “Red/green sensitivity in normal vision,” Vis. Res. 4, 75–85 (1964). [CrossRef]
  20. C. M. Cicerone, “Constraints placed on color vision models by the relative numbers of different cone classes in human fovea centralis,” Die Farbe 34, 59–66 (1987).
  21. K. L. Gunther and K. R. Dobkins, “Individual differences in chromatic (red/green) contrast sensitivity are constrained by the relative number of L- versus M-cones in the eye,” Vis. Res. 42, 1367–1378 (2002). [CrossRef]
  22. E. Miyahara, J. Pokorny, V. C. Smith, R. Baron, and E. Baron, “Color vision in two observers with highly biased LWS/MWS cone ratios,” Vis. Res. 38, 601–612 (1998). [CrossRef]
  23. G. Jordan and J. D. Mollon, “Unique hues in heterozygotes for protan and deutan deficiencies,” in Colour Vision Deficiencies XIII, C. R. Cavonius, ed. (Kluwer Academic, 1997), pp. 67–76.
  24. D. H. Brainard, A. Roorda, Y. Yamaguchi, J. B. Calderone, A. Metha, M. Neitz, J. Neitz, D. R. Williams, and G. H. Jacobs, “Functional consequences of the relative numbers of L and M cones,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 17, 607–614 (2000). [CrossRef]

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.

Figures

Fig. 1. Fig. 2.
 

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited