Abstract

Data on perceived brightness and visual acuity were obtained under essentially identical conditions of steady and intermittent illumination, using long exposures (up to 45 sec) as well as brief ones (250 msec). Flicker frequencies down to 8 cps and light-time fraction to 0.083 were sampled. By taking into account the exact duration of the test exposures, a more general form of Talbot’s law was derived, which fits all the brightness matches obtained. When this new equation is used as a yardstick, intermittent illumination turns out to be less efficient than steady illumination so far as visual acuity is concerned for brief exposures. For long exposures it is more efficient, as was previously reported by Senders.

© 1958 Optical Society of America

Full Article  |  PDF Article

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |
  • |

  1. V. L. Senders, J. Exptl. Psychol. 39, 453–465 (1949).
    [Crossref]
  2. S. J. Geratewohl and W. F. Taylor, J. Exptl. Psychol. 46, 278–282 (1953).
    [Crossref]
  3. V. L. Senders, J. Exptl. Psychol. 47, 135–136 (1954).
    [Crossref]
  4. S. Hecht, Physiol. Rev. 17, 239–290 (1937).
  5. E. P. Hyde, Bull. Bur. Standards 2, 1 (1906).
    [Crossref]
  6. S. H. Bartley, J. Psychol. 32, 57–6295(11).
  7. R. H. Mitchell and L. H. Liandausky, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 45, 831–834 (1955).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  8. S. H. Bartley, J. Exptl. Psychol. 23, 313–319 (1938).
    [Crossref]
  9. S. Hecht, Handbook of General Experimental Psychology, edited by Murchison (Clark University Press, Worcester, Massachusetts, 1934), pp. 704–828.
    [Crossref]
  10. C. H. Graham and C. Cook, Am. J. Psychol. 49, 654–661 (1937).
    [Crossref]
  11. E. Davy, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 52, 937–941 (1952).
    [Crossref]
  12. S. Hecht and E. U. Mintz, J. Gen. Physiol. 22, 593–612 (1939). Actually, the authors assert that the resolution of a grating is limited by the grain of the retinal mosaic before an otherwise minimal value of ΔI/I is reached.
  13. R. W. Ditchburn, Research 9, 466–471 (1956).
  14. Riggs, Ratliff, Cornsweet, and Cornsweet, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 43, 495–501 (1953).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]

1956 (1)

R. W. Ditchburn, Research 9, 466–471 (1956).

1955 (1)

1954 (1)

V. L. Senders, J. Exptl. Psychol. 47, 135–136 (1954).
[Crossref]

1953 (2)

S. J. Geratewohl and W. F. Taylor, J. Exptl. Psychol. 46, 278–282 (1953).
[Crossref]

Riggs, Ratliff, Cornsweet, and Cornsweet, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 43, 495–501 (1953).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

1952 (1)

E. Davy, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 52, 937–941 (1952).
[Crossref]

1949 (1)

V. L. Senders, J. Exptl. Psychol. 39, 453–465 (1949).
[Crossref]

1939 (1)

S. Hecht and E. U. Mintz, J. Gen. Physiol. 22, 593–612 (1939). Actually, the authors assert that the resolution of a grating is limited by the grain of the retinal mosaic before an otherwise minimal value of ΔI/I is reached.

1938 (1)

S. H. Bartley, J. Exptl. Psychol. 23, 313–319 (1938).
[Crossref]

1937 (2)

C. H. Graham and C. Cook, Am. J. Psychol. 49, 654–661 (1937).
[Crossref]

S. Hecht, Physiol. Rev. 17, 239–290 (1937).

1906 (1)

E. P. Hyde, Bull. Bur. Standards 2, 1 (1906).
[Crossref]

Bartley, S. H.

S. H. Bartley, J. Exptl. Psychol. 23, 313–319 (1938).
[Crossref]

S. H. Bartley, J. Psychol. 32, 57–6295(11).

Cook, C.

C. H. Graham and C. Cook, Am. J. Psychol. 49, 654–661 (1937).
[Crossref]

Cornsweet,

Davy, E.

E. Davy, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 52, 937–941 (1952).
[Crossref]

Ditchburn, R. W.

R. W. Ditchburn, Research 9, 466–471 (1956).

Geratewohl, S. J.

S. J. Geratewohl and W. F. Taylor, J. Exptl. Psychol. 46, 278–282 (1953).
[Crossref]

Graham, C. H.

C. H. Graham and C. Cook, Am. J. Psychol. 49, 654–661 (1937).
[Crossref]

Hecht, S.

S. Hecht and E. U. Mintz, J. Gen. Physiol. 22, 593–612 (1939). Actually, the authors assert that the resolution of a grating is limited by the grain of the retinal mosaic before an otherwise minimal value of ΔI/I is reached.

S. Hecht, Physiol. Rev. 17, 239–290 (1937).

S. Hecht, Handbook of General Experimental Psychology, edited by Murchison (Clark University Press, Worcester, Massachusetts, 1934), pp. 704–828.
[Crossref]

Hyde, E. P.

E. P. Hyde, Bull. Bur. Standards 2, 1 (1906).
[Crossref]

Liandausky, L. H.

Mintz, E. U.

S. Hecht and E. U. Mintz, J. Gen. Physiol. 22, 593–612 (1939). Actually, the authors assert that the resolution of a grating is limited by the grain of the retinal mosaic before an otherwise minimal value of ΔI/I is reached.

Mitchell, R. H.

Ratliff,

Riggs,

Senders, V. L.

V. L. Senders, J. Exptl. Psychol. 47, 135–136 (1954).
[Crossref]

V. L. Senders, J. Exptl. Psychol. 39, 453–465 (1949).
[Crossref]

Taylor, W. F.

S. J. Geratewohl and W. F. Taylor, J. Exptl. Psychol. 46, 278–282 (1953).
[Crossref]

Am. J. Psychol. (1)

C. H. Graham and C. Cook, Am. J. Psychol. 49, 654–661 (1937).
[Crossref]

Bull. Bur. Standards (1)

E. P. Hyde, Bull. Bur. Standards 2, 1 (1906).
[Crossref]

J. Exptl. Psychol. (4)

S. H. Bartley, J. Exptl. Psychol. 23, 313–319 (1938).
[Crossref]

V. L. Senders, J. Exptl. Psychol. 39, 453–465 (1949).
[Crossref]

S. J. Geratewohl and W. F. Taylor, J. Exptl. Psychol. 46, 278–282 (1953).
[Crossref]

V. L. Senders, J. Exptl. Psychol. 47, 135–136 (1954).
[Crossref]

J. Gen. Physiol. (1)

S. Hecht and E. U. Mintz, J. Gen. Physiol. 22, 593–612 (1939). Actually, the authors assert that the resolution of a grating is limited by the grain of the retinal mosaic before an otherwise minimal value of ΔI/I is reached.

J. Opt. Soc. Am. (3)

J. Psychol. (1)

S. H. Bartley, J. Psychol. 32, 57–6295(11).

Physiol. Rev. (1)

S. Hecht, Physiol. Rev. 17, 239–290 (1937).

Research (1)

R. W. Ditchburn, Research 9, 466–471 (1956).

Other (1)

S. Hecht, Handbook of General Experimental Psychology, edited by Murchison (Clark University Press, Worcester, Massachusetts, 1934), pp. 704–828.
[Crossref]

Cited By

OSA participates in Crossref's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from OSA journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.


Figures (5)

Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Schematic diagram of the apparatus.

Fig. 2
Fig. 2

The relation between log relative luminance required for a brightness match and log light-time fraction. The data from both observers were obtained with the upward method of limits. The solid line is a plot of Talbot’s law.

Fig. 3
Fig. 3

Brightness data obtained from both observers with the staircase method plotted to show the relation between log relative luminance required for a brightness match and 0.7 log (t/t0)−logf. The solid line is a plot of Eq. (4).

Fig. 4
Fig. 4

The relation between log relative luminance required for resolution of the grating and 0.7 log (t/t0)−log f. Data from both observers obtained with the staircase method lie above the solid line, which is a plot of Eq. (4); data obtained with the upward method of limits lie below the line.

Fig. 5
Fig. 5

The relation between log luminance at which the striations are seen for different fractions of the exposure and log light-time fraction. The solid line is a plot of Talbot’s law. Data were obtained from observer RV with the fluctuation method.

Equations (7)

Equations on this page are rendered with MathJax. Learn more.

I × [ ( n l ) / ( n l + n d - d ) ] = I 0
log I - log I 0 = - log [ ( n l ) / ( n l + n d - d ) ] .
log I 0 t 0 ( l - k ) = c ,
log I t ( l - k ) - log I 0 t 0 ( l - k ) = - log [ ( n l ) / ( n l + n d - d ) ] log ( I / I 0 ) = ( k - l ) log ( t / t 0 ) - log [ ( n l ) / ( n l + n d - d ) ]
log ( n l / t ) = log ( n l / t 0 ) + log ( t 0 / t ) log ( I / I 0 ) = k log ( t / t 0 ) - log ( n l / t 0 ) .
log ( I / I 0 ) = 0.7 log ( t / t 0 ) - log f .
log ( I / I 0 ) = - log ( n l / t 0 ) or I n l = I 0 t 0 ,