Abstract

The parts of a complex, semirandom image containing 100 different mixtures of red and tungsten light were matched to Munsell color papers. Similar combinations of the two illuminants were matched separately as aperture colors (i.e., as isolated test patches in a dark surround) and also as test patches on eight homogeneous backgrounds containing mixtures of the two illuminants. A total of 3500 matches were obtained from 14 observers. The complex image and certain of the simple-image sets gave hue, lightness, and saturation patterns, over the sampled ranges of purity and luminance, that were almost identical, especially when compared with the aperture color responses. However, the results may support the possibility of a complex image that would produce “richer” hue characteristics than those generated by a set of simple images, if the latter were confined to a single background mixture of red and tungsten light.

© 1963 Optical Society of America

Full Article  |  PDF Article

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |
  • |

  1. L. Wheeler, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 52, 1058 (1962). Complete data tables for the color-naming study referred to here and for the color-matching studies may be obtained from University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan, Document No. 62–5090 (a doctoral dissertation in psychology, Indiana University).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. E. H. Land, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. 45, 115 (1959).
    [CrossRef]
  3. E. H. Land, Sci. Am. 200, 84 (1959).
    [CrossRef]
  4. G. L. Walls, Psychol. Bull. 57, 29 (1960).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. A. Karp, Nature 184, 710 (1959); Nature 188, 40 (1960).
    [CrossRef]
  6. D. B. Judd, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 50, 254 (1960).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. D. B. Judd, J. Res. Natl. Bur. Std. 24, 294 (1940).
    [CrossRef]
  8. L. M. Hurvich and D. Jameson, J. Gen. Physiol. 43, 63 (1960); Science 133, 174 (1961); J. Opt. Soc. Am. 51, 46 (1961).
    [CrossRef]
  9. H. Helson, J. Exptl. Psychol. 23, 439 (1938).
    [CrossRef]
  10. H. Helson and V. B. Jeffers, J. Exptl. Psychol. 26, 1 (1940).
    [CrossRef]
  11. Munsell Color Company. Munsell system of color notation, publications, materials, and equipment, Baltimore, Maryland, 1960.
  12. Munsell Color Company. Constant hue loci chart set, OSA subcommittee on the spacing of the Munsell colors, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 33, 385 (1943).
    [CrossRef]
  13. Eastman Kodak Company, Kodak Wratten Filters for Scientific And Technical Use, 19th ed., B–3 (1957).
  14. A similar observation is made in: M. S. Wilson and R. W. Brocklebank, J. Phot. Sci. 8, 141 (1960); an important description of color-naming responses to a variety of complex, synthetic images contrasted with responses to natural images; these investigators also conclude that the two types of image are, or can be, equivalent in variety of hue. The writer regrets that this study did not come to his attention prior to publication of his color-naming paper.1
  15. An uncertainty measure exists for comparing the differential “flatness” of two or more frequency distributions; e.g., C. E. Shannon, Bell System Tech. J. 27, 379 (1948). F. J. Restle directed the author’s attention to this measure and also made technical suggestions that improved this section of the paper.
    [CrossRef]
  16. See Ref. 14. Wilson and Brocklebank discuss the doubled density situation in greater detail than does the present report.

1962 (1)

1960 (4)

D. B. Judd, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 50, 254 (1960).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

G. L. Walls, Psychol. Bull. 57, 29 (1960).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

L. M. Hurvich and D. Jameson, J. Gen. Physiol. 43, 63 (1960); Science 133, 174 (1961); J. Opt. Soc. Am. 51, 46 (1961).
[CrossRef]

A similar observation is made in: M. S. Wilson and R. W. Brocklebank, J. Phot. Sci. 8, 141 (1960); an important description of color-naming responses to a variety of complex, synthetic images contrasted with responses to natural images; these investigators also conclude that the two types of image are, or can be, equivalent in variety of hue. The writer regrets that this study did not come to his attention prior to publication of his color-naming paper.1

1959 (3)

A. Karp, Nature 184, 710 (1959); Nature 188, 40 (1960).
[CrossRef]

E. H. Land, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. 45, 115 (1959).
[CrossRef]

E. H. Land, Sci. Am. 200, 84 (1959).
[CrossRef]

1948 (1)

An uncertainty measure exists for comparing the differential “flatness” of two or more frequency distributions; e.g., C. E. Shannon, Bell System Tech. J. 27, 379 (1948). F. J. Restle directed the author’s attention to this measure and also made technical suggestions that improved this section of the paper.
[CrossRef]

1943 (1)

1940 (2)

D. B. Judd, J. Res. Natl. Bur. Std. 24, 294 (1940).
[CrossRef]

H. Helson and V. B. Jeffers, J. Exptl. Psychol. 26, 1 (1940).
[CrossRef]

1938 (1)

H. Helson, J. Exptl. Psychol. 23, 439 (1938).
[CrossRef]

Brocklebank, R. W.

A similar observation is made in: M. S. Wilson and R. W. Brocklebank, J. Phot. Sci. 8, 141 (1960); an important description of color-naming responses to a variety of complex, synthetic images contrasted with responses to natural images; these investigators also conclude that the two types of image are, or can be, equivalent in variety of hue. The writer regrets that this study did not come to his attention prior to publication of his color-naming paper.1

Helson, H.

H. Helson and V. B. Jeffers, J. Exptl. Psychol. 26, 1 (1940).
[CrossRef]

H. Helson, J. Exptl. Psychol. 23, 439 (1938).
[CrossRef]

Hurvich, L. M.

L. M. Hurvich and D. Jameson, J. Gen. Physiol. 43, 63 (1960); Science 133, 174 (1961); J. Opt. Soc. Am. 51, 46 (1961).
[CrossRef]

Jameson, D.

L. M. Hurvich and D. Jameson, J. Gen. Physiol. 43, 63 (1960); Science 133, 174 (1961); J. Opt. Soc. Am. 51, 46 (1961).
[CrossRef]

Jeffers, V. B.

H. Helson and V. B. Jeffers, J. Exptl. Psychol. 26, 1 (1940).
[CrossRef]

Judd, D. B.

D. B. Judd, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 50, 254 (1960).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

D. B. Judd, J. Res. Natl. Bur. Std. 24, 294 (1940).
[CrossRef]

Karp, A.

A. Karp, Nature 184, 710 (1959); Nature 188, 40 (1960).
[CrossRef]

Land, E. H.

E. H. Land, Sci. Am. 200, 84 (1959).
[CrossRef]

E. H. Land, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. 45, 115 (1959).
[CrossRef]

Shannon, C. E.

An uncertainty measure exists for comparing the differential “flatness” of two or more frequency distributions; e.g., C. E. Shannon, Bell System Tech. J. 27, 379 (1948). F. J. Restle directed the author’s attention to this measure and also made technical suggestions that improved this section of the paper.
[CrossRef]

Walls, G. L.

G. L. Walls, Psychol. Bull. 57, 29 (1960).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

Wheeler, L.

Wilson, M. S.

A similar observation is made in: M. S. Wilson and R. W. Brocklebank, J. Phot. Sci. 8, 141 (1960); an important description of color-naming responses to a variety of complex, synthetic images contrasted with responses to natural images; these investigators also conclude that the two types of image are, or can be, equivalent in variety of hue. The writer regrets that this study did not come to his attention prior to publication of his color-naming paper.1

Bell System Tech. J. (1)

An uncertainty measure exists for comparing the differential “flatness” of two or more frequency distributions; e.g., C. E. Shannon, Bell System Tech. J. 27, 379 (1948). F. J. Restle directed the author’s attention to this measure and also made technical suggestions that improved this section of the paper.
[CrossRef]

J. Exptl. Psychol. (2)

H. Helson, J. Exptl. Psychol. 23, 439 (1938).
[CrossRef]

H. Helson and V. B. Jeffers, J. Exptl. Psychol. 26, 1 (1940).
[CrossRef]

J. Gen. Physiol. (1)

L. M. Hurvich and D. Jameson, J. Gen. Physiol. 43, 63 (1960); Science 133, 174 (1961); J. Opt. Soc. Am. 51, 46 (1961).
[CrossRef]

J. Opt. Soc. Am. (3)

J. Phot. Sci. (1)

A similar observation is made in: M. S. Wilson and R. W. Brocklebank, J. Phot. Sci. 8, 141 (1960); an important description of color-naming responses to a variety of complex, synthetic images contrasted with responses to natural images; these investigators also conclude that the two types of image are, or can be, equivalent in variety of hue. The writer regrets that this study did not come to his attention prior to publication of his color-naming paper.1

J. Res. Natl. Bur. Std. (1)

D. B. Judd, J. Res. Natl. Bur. Std. 24, 294 (1940).
[CrossRef]

Nature (1)

A. Karp, Nature 184, 710 (1959); Nature 188, 40 (1960).
[CrossRef]

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. (1)

E. H. Land, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. 45, 115 (1959).
[CrossRef]

Psychol. Bull. (1)

G. L. Walls, Psychol. Bull. 57, 29 (1960).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

Sci. Am. (1)

E. H. Land, Sci. Am. 200, 84 (1959).
[CrossRef]

Other (3)

Munsell Color Company. Munsell system of color notation, publications, materials, and equipment, Baltimore, Maryland, 1960.

Eastman Kodak Company, Kodak Wratten Filters for Scientific And Technical Use, 19th ed., B–3 (1957).

See Ref. 14. Wilson and Brocklebank discuss the doubled density situation in greater detail than does the present report.

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 (10)

Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Schematic diagram of the apparatus: A, red and neutral integrating filters; B, neutral filter holder; C, opaque shadow-casters; D, image screen; E, red filter (27.5%t); F, neutral filter (32%t); G, adjustable front lenses; H, neutral filter holders; I, 100-cell slides or open squares in brass slides; J, condensers for front projectors; K, light sources; L, shutter on booth; M, aperture in booth; N, Munsell charts on stand of Macbeth lamp. Insert (upper left) shows complex and simple images schematically; each small square was approximately 9 mm × 9 mm on the screen and subtended 17 to 18 min. Technical advice on the optical system, from G. G. Heath, is gratefully acknowledged.

Fig. 2
Fig. 2

Sampling space defined by percent transmittance of red light to the image (and percent transmittance of the variable neutral filter for the red light) plotted against the same values for the tungsten light; 100 simple-image samples represented by filled circles; open circles represent complex-image samples. Proportion of red light in a given sample may be estimated by reference to the fan of solid lines marked p R = 1.0, p R = 0.9, etc.; relative luminance in a given sample may be estimated by reference to the parallel dotted lines marked L = 1.0, L = 0.9, etc. Note that because the red filter passed 27.5% of the light and the 0.5d neutral filter passed 32%, the relative luminance and proportion of red light lines are not exactly symmetrical relative to the major diagonal of the coordinate system (lower left to upper right). The relative luminance of 1.0, in the lightest simple-image sample, was approximately 10 ft-L in the present experimental conditions. In the CIE chromaticity coordinates all sampling points (except 0%t red–0%t tungsten) theoretically occur on a line from illuminant A (tungsten) to 612 mμ on the spectrum locus (see Fig. 4).

Fig. 3
Fig. 3

(a) Complex- and simple-image relative luminance; test-patch frequency within each scale interval, plotted at the interval midpoints and smoothed for ease of reading. (b) Complex- and simple-image proportion of red light; same plotting conditions.

Fig. 4
Fig. 4

(a) CIE chromaticity coordinates for 100 averaged matching responses from five subjects who observed the simple-image test patches as aperture colors (black-background condition). The sampling points of Fig. 2 are here represented by: × is the major diagonal of the sampling space; + is the minor diagonal; filled circles are the left quadrant; open circles are the upper quadrant; filled triangles are the right quadrant; open triangles are the lower quadrant. Positions of the C illuminant (used in subject booth), tungsten illumination (A), and the red filter (dominant wavelength of 612 mμ) are indicated. (b) CIE chromaticity coordinates for 100 averaged matching responses from six subjects who observed the simple-image test patches in the pink-background condition (100% of the available red and of the available tungsten illumination); same key for symbols. (c) 100 averaged matching responses from four subjects who observed the complex image; same key for symbols. Four subjects were common to (a) and (b) above, but the subjects in (c) were a completely different group.

Fig. 5
Fig. 5

Complex- and simple-image (black- and pink-background conditions) Munsell value response frequencies for the subjects enumerated in Fig. 4; Munsell V is also shown as CIE Y12 (relative to MgO); 100 averaged responses per background condition; curves smoothed for ease of reading.

Fig. 6
Fig. 6

Complex- and simple-image (black- and pink-background conditions) Munsell chroma response frequencies for the subjects enumerated in Fig. 4; 100 averaged responses per background condition; curves smoothed for ease of reading.

Fig. 7
Fig. 7

CIE chromaticity coordinates of responses in the outermost layer of sampling cells of the percent-transmittance space (Fig. 2); five subjects, each in a different background condition: (a) S#8 red background, S#11 pink, S#9 salmon; and (b) S#7 black; S#10 white.

Fig. 8
Fig. 8

Cumulative response frequencies of Munsell hue for one observer (S#5) who made 100 matches in each of the six background conditions shown in the figure. Consult Table I for the percentages of red and tungsten light employed in each of these situations.

Fig. 9
Fig. 9

(a) Munsell hue and value relationships in three background conditions (black, pink, and complex) for the subjects enumerated in Fig. 4; 100 averaged responses per scatter diagram. (b) Munsell hue and chroma relationships for the same subjects and backgrounds, (c) Munsell chroma and value relationships for the same subjects and backgrounds.

Fig. 10
Fig. 10

Land’s data2 plotted in arithmetic coordinates. The effects of doubling the positive image in the long-wave (red) projector are shown for a red, a neutral, and a blue “imaginary line.” The loci of all points available when a negative is placed in one projector and a positive made from that negative is placed in the other, are given on the dashed and dotted line. Land’s named color loci are given as filled circles. Scale “A” on the abscissa is the extent of the available tungsten light when a 32%-transmittance neutral filter is used to balance a 27.5%-transmittance red filter (as in the present color-matching experiment); Scale “B” is the extent of the available tungsten light when a 50%-transmittance neutral filter balances the red filter (as in some of Land’s studies); it appears that Land used higher luminances than were employed in the present color-matching experiment; 100% of the available tungsten light in the latter may have been equal to about 63% of the available tungsten light in Land’s work (whenever he used a fixed 50%-transmittance neutral filter).

Tables (8)

Tables Icon

Table I Outline of the experimental design; the entry of a subject identification number indicates 100 tripartite H V/C responses.

Tables Icon

Table II Averaged color-matching responses: hue, value, chroma; simple image, black background condition; percentages of transmittance of red and tungsten light vary as shown in Fig. 2.

Tables Icon

Table III Averaged color-matching responses: hue, value, chroma; simple image, white background condition; percentages of transmittance of red and tungsten light vary as shown in Fig. 2.

Tables Icon

Table IV Averaged color-matching responses: hue, value, chroma; simple image, red background condition; percentages of transmittance of red and tungsten light vary as shown in Fig. 2.

Tables Icon

Table V Averaged color-matching responses: hue, value, chroma; simple image, salmon background condition; percentages of transmittance of red and tungsten light vary as shown in Fig. 2.

Tables Icon

Table VI Averaged color-matching responses: hue, value, chroma; simple image, pink background condition; percentages of transmittance of red and tungsten light vary as shown in Fig. 2.

Tables Icon

Table VII Averaged color-matching responses: hue, value, chroma; complex image background condition; percentages of transmittance of red and tungsten light vary as shown in Fig. 2.

Tables Icon

Table VIII Averaged hue, value, and chroma responses for six background conditions; 100 sampling cells summarized at seven percentile levels; value and chroma expressed as proportion of the response range; relative luminance and proportion of red light for the simple and complex image conditions; average deviation of response variable from physical variable.