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. 5, Iss. 8 — Aug. 1, 1988
  • pp: 1356–1361

Spectral response of contrast-flash masking

Adam Reeves and Marcus A. Bearse, Jr.  »View Author Affiliations


JOSA A, Vol. 5, Issue 8, pp. 1356-1361 (1988)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/JOSAA.5.001356


View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (705 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

Parafoveal spectral response functions for the contrast-flash masking of a just-visible 661-nm bar test are proportional to Π5 (Stiles’s long-wave function) at long wavelengths but show an unexpected dip around 575 nm and are almost flat at short wavelengths, on a dim (2-Td) rod-desensitizing 500-nm auxiliary. This effect is not due to rod intrusions or scattered light. Masking functions are approximately proportional to Π5 throughout the spectrum, however, if the 500-nm auxiliary is replaced by a π5-equated 445-nm auxiliary or if the flanking bar mask used in the main experiment is replaced by a uniform contrast-flash mask. These results suggest that a contour-sensitive interaction involving short-wave cones may modify the extent of masking in the pathway that detects the long-wave test.

© 1988 Optical Society of America

History
Original Manuscript: June 11, 1987
Manuscript Accepted: April 19, 1988
Published: August 1, 1988

Citation
Adam Reeves and Marcus A. Bearse, "Spectral response of contrast-flash masking," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 5, 1356-1361 (1988)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/josaa/abstract.cfm?URI=josaa-5-8-1356


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. M. Alpern, W. A. H. Rushton, “The specificity of the cone interaction in the after-flash effect,”J. Physiol. (London) 176, 473–482 (1965).
  2. J. I. Yellott, B. A. Wandell, “Color properties of the contrast flash effect: monoptic vs. dichoptic comparisons,” Vision Res. 16, 1275–1280 (1976). [CrossRef]
  3. C. R. Cavonius, A. Reeves, “The interpretation of metacontrast and contrast-flash spectral sensitivity,” in Colour Vision, J. Mollon, L. Sharpe, eds. (Academic, London, 1983).
  4. G. Wald, “Human vision and the spectrum,” Science 101, 653–658 (1945). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. A. Reeves, N. S. Peachey, E. Auerbach, “Interocular sensitization to a rod-detected test,” Vision Res. 26, 1119–1127 (1986). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. J. Krauskopf, “Light distribution in human retinal images,”J. Opt. Soc. Am. 52, 1046–1050 (1962). [CrossRef]
  7. W. S. Stiles, “The directional sensitivity of the retina and the spectral sensitivities of the rods and cones,” Proc. R. Soc. Ser. B 127, 64–105 (1939). [CrossRef]
  8. W. S. Stiles, Mechanisms of Colour Vision (Academic, London, 1978); G. W. Wyszecki, W. S. Stiles, Color Science (Wiley, New York, 1967).
  9. G. Haegerstorm-Portnoy, A. J. Adams, W. Verdon, “Do pi mechanisms only exist at the fovea?” Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. Suppl. 25, 147 (1984). These authors reported some distortion of Π5in the parafovea, which was not obvious here.
  10. K. R. Alexander, “Sensitization by annular surrounds: sensitization and the contrast-flash effect,” Vision Res. 14, 623–631 (1974); K. R. Alexander, S. Barry, “Visual masking and the contrast-flash effect,” Vision Res. 21, 301–309 (1981). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. B. R. Wooten, G. A. Geri, “Psychophysical determination of intraocular light scatter as a function of wavelength,” Vision Res. 27, 1291–1298 (1987). These authors showed scatter to be independent of wavelength, but their measurements were made 1.5 deg from the source of the scattered light. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. M. Alpern, “Rod–cone independence in the after-flash effect,”J. Physiol. London 176, 462–472 (1965).
  13. D. H. Foster, “Rod-cone interaction in the after-flash effect,” Vision Res. 16, 393–396 (1976). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. A. Reeves, M. Bearse, “The spectral response of masking in metacontrast,” Invest. Ophthalmol. Visual Sci. Suppl. 26, 183 (1985).
  15. The overall masking levels were elevated by 0.2 log unit for observer AR, compared with the earlier measurements (Fig. 2), and by 0.4 log unit for observer MB (compared with Fig. 3). As the experiments were conducted several months apart, this overall change may not be significant.
  16. On the auxiliary, π5is 0.75 log unit more sensitive than is π4to the 661-nm test. Thus the criterion test should only stimulate π5if these foveal estimates8 apply to the periphery.
  17. A. Reeves, “Metacontrast in hue substitution,” Vision Res. 21, 907–912 (1981); D. H. Foster, “Interactions between blue- and red-sensitive colour mechanisms in metacontrast masking,” Vision Res. 19, 921–931 (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.

Figures

Fig. 1 Fig. 2 Fig. 3
 
Fig. 4 Fig. 5
 

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited