Abstract

We assessed the detectability d of a monocular small gray dot target presented on a half-occluded region of stereoscopic three-dimensional background images by comparing it with that on a two-dimensional (2D) region. For our experiments we used a typical two-alternative temporal forced-choice procedure, in which the target was presented in one of two temporal intervals for ∼67 ms, and observers selected the interval they believed to have contained the target by pressing the corresponding key. To vary target signal intensity, we changed the target contrast against the background. According to signal-detection theory, we converted the percent-correct data to detectability d and found that the relationship between d and the contrast of the target followed Legge’s equation. We used Legge’s equation to calculate the contrast threshold and found that the contrast threshold of the target on the half-occluded region was higher than that on the 2D region. This elevation of contrast threshold indicates that interocular suppression of the half-occluded region occurs more frequently than that of the 2D region. We also refer to the monocular performance of the human visual system.

© 1998 Optical Society of America

Full Article  |  PDF Article

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |
  • |

  1. C. M. Aschenbrenner, “Problems in getting information into and out of air photographs,” Photogramm. Eng. 20, 398–401 (1954).
  2. B. Julesz, “Binocular depth perception of computer generated patterns,” Bell Syst. Tech. J. 39, 1125–1162 (1960).
    [CrossRef]
  3. B. Julesz, “Binocular depth perception without familiarity cues,” Science 145, 356–362 (1964).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. S. Shimojo, K. Nakayama, “Real world occlusion constraints and binocular rivalry,” Vision Res. 30, 69–80 (1990).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. S. Shimojo, K. Nakayama, “Interocularly unpaired zones escape local binocular matching,” Vision Res. 34, 1875–1881 (1994).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. H. R. Blackwell, “Psychophysical thresholds: experimental studies of methods of measurement,” (University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich., 1953).
  7. J. S. Lukaszewski, D. N. Elliott, “Auditory threshold as a function of forced-choice techniques, feedback, and motivation,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 34, 223–228 (1962).
    [CrossRef]
  8. J. A. Swets, ed., Signal Detection and Recognition by Human Observers: Contemporary Readings (Wiley, New York, 1964).
  9. G. E. Legge, “Binocular contrast summation-1,” Vision Res. 24, 373–383 (1983).
    [CrossRef]
  10. M. Emoto, T. Mitsuhashi, “Perception of edge sharpness in three dimensional images,” in Human Vision, Visual Processing, and Digital Display VI, B. E. Rogowitz, J. P. Allebach, eds., Proc. SPIE2411, 250–261 (1995).
    [CrossRef]
  11. W. Makous, D. Teller, R. Boothe, “Binocular interaction in the dark,” Vision Res. 16, 473–476 (1976).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. B. Gillam, E. Borsting, “The role of monocular regions in stereoscopic displays,” Perception 17, 603–608 (1988).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. L. Liu, S. B. Stevenson, C. M. Schor, “Quantitative stereoscopic depth without binocular correspondence,” Nature (London) 367, 66–69 (1994).
    [CrossRef]

1994

S. Shimojo, K. Nakayama, “Interocularly unpaired zones escape local binocular matching,” Vision Res. 34, 1875–1881 (1994).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

L. Liu, S. B. Stevenson, C. M. Schor, “Quantitative stereoscopic depth without binocular correspondence,” Nature (London) 367, 66–69 (1994).
[CrossRef]

1990

S. Shimojo, K. Nakayama, “Real world occlusion constraints and binocular rivalry,” Vision Res. 30, 69–80 (1990).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

1988

B. Gillam, E. Borsting, “The role of monocular regions in stereoscopic displays,” Perception 17, 603–608 (1988).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

1983

G. E. Legge, “Binocular contrast summation-1,” Vision Res. 24, 373–383 (1983).
[CrossRef]

1976

W. Makous, D. Teller, R. Boothe, “Binocular interaction in the dark,” Vision Res. 16, 473–476 (1976).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

1964

B. Julesz, “Binocular depth perception without familiarity cues,” Science 145, 356–362 (1964).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

1962

J. S. Lukaszewski, D. N. Elliott, “Auditory threshold as a function of forced-choice techniques, feedback, and motivation,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 34, 223–228 (1962).
[CrossRef]

1960

B. Julesz, “Binocular depth perception of computer generated patterns,” Bell Syst. Tech. J. 39, 1125–1162 (1960).
[CrossRef]

1954

C. M. Aschenbrenner, “Problems in getting information into and out of air photographs,” Photogramm. Eng. 20, 398–401 (1954).

Aschenbrenner, C. M.

C. M. Aschenbrenner, “Problems in getting information into and out of air photographs,” Photogramm. Eng. 20, 398–401 (1954).

Blackwell, H. R.

H. R. Blackwell, “Psychophysical thresholds: experimental studies of methods of measurement,” (University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich., 1953).

Boothe, R.

W. Makous, D. Teller, R. Boothe, “Binocular interaction in the dark,” Vision Res. 16, 473–476 (1976).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

Borsting, E.

B. Gillam, E. Borsting, “The role of monocular regions in stereoscopic displays,” Perception 17, 603–608 (1988).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

Elliott, D. N.

J. S. Lukaszewski, D. N. Elliott, “Auditory threshold as a function of forced-choice techniques, feedback, and motivation,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 34, 223–228 (1962).
[CrossRef]

Emoto, M.

M. Emoto, T. Mitsuhashi, “Perception of edge sharpness in three dimensional images,” in Human Vision, Visual Processing, and Digital Display VI, B. E. Rogowitz, J. P. Allebach, eds., Proc. SPIE2411, 250–261 (1995).
[CrossRef]

Gillam, B.

B. Gillam, E. Borsting, “The role of monocular regions in stereoscopic displays,” Perception 17, 603–608 (1988).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

Julesz, B.

B. Julesz, “Binocular depth perception without familiarity cues,” Science 145, 356–362 (1964).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

B. Julesz, “Binocular depth perception of computer generated patterns,” Bell Syst. Tech. J. 39, 1125–1162 (1960).
[CrossRef]

Legge, G. E.

G. E. Legge, “Binocular contrast summation-1,” Vision Res. 24, 373–383 (1983).
[CrossRef]

Liu, L.

L. Liu, S. B. Stevenson, C. M. Schor, “Quantitative stereoscopic depth without binocular correspondence,” Nature (London) 367, 66–69 (1994).
[CrossRef]

Lukaszewski, J. S.

J. S. Lukaszewski, D. N. Elliott, “Auditory threshold as a function of forced-choice techniques, feedback, and motivation,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 34, 223–228 (1962).
[CrossRef]

Makous, W.

W. Makous, D. Teller, R. Boothe, “Binocular interaction in the dark,” Vision Res. 16, 473–476 (1976).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

Mitsuhashi, T.

M. Emoto, T. Mitsuhashi, “Perception of edge sharpness in three dimensional images,” in Human Vision, Visual Processing, and Digital Display VI, B. E. Rogowitz, J. P. Allebach, eds., Proc. SPIE2411, 250–261 (1995).
[CrossRef]

Nakayama, K.

S. Shimojo, K. Nakayama, “Interocularly unpaired zones escape local binocular matching,” Vision Res. 34, 1875–1881 (1994).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

S. Shimojo, K. Nakayama, “Real world occlusion constraints and binocular rivalry,” Vision Res. 30, 69–80 (1990).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

Schor, C. M.

L. Liu, S. B. Stevenson, C. M. Schor, “Quantitative stereoscopic depth without binocular correspondence,” Nature (London) 367, 66–69 (1994).
[CrossRef]

Shimojo, S.

S. Shimojo, K. Nakayama, “Interocularly unpaired zones escape local binocular matching,” Vision Res. 34, 1875–1881 (1994).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

S. Shimojo, K. Nakayama, “Real world occlusion constraints and binocular rivalry,” Vision Res. 30, 69–80 (1990).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

Stevenson, S. B.

L. Liu, S. B. Stevenson, C. M. Schor, “Quantitative stereoscopic depth without binocular correspondence,” Nature (London) 367, 66–69 (1994).
[CrossRef]

Teller, D.

W. Makous, D. Teller, R. Boothe, “Binocular interaction in the dark,” Vision Res. 16, 473–476 (1976).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

Bell Syst. Tech. J.

B. Julesz, “Binocular depth perception of computer generated patterns,” Bell Syst. Tech. J. 39, 1125–1162 (1960).
[CrossRef]

J. Acoust. Soc. Am.

J. S. Lukaszewski, D. N. Elliott, “Auditory threshold as a function of forced-choice techniques, feedback, and motivation,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 34, 223–228 (1962).
[CrossRef]

Nature (London)

L. Liu, S. B. Stevenson, C. M. Schor, “Quantitative stereoscopic depth without binocular correspondence,” Nature (London) 367, 66–69 (1994).
[CrossRef]

Perception

B. Gillam, E. Borsting, “The role of monocular regions in stereoscopic displays,” Perception 17, 603–608 (1988).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

Photogramm. Eng.

C. M. Aschenbrenner, “Problems in getting information into and out of air photographs,” Photogramm. Eng. 20, 398–401 (1954).

Science

B. Julesz, “Binocular depth perception without familiarity cues,” Science 145, 356–362 (1964).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

Vision Res.

S. Shimojo, K. Nakayama, “Real world occlusion constraints and binocular rivalry,” Vision Res. 30, 69–80 (1990).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

S. Shimojo, K. Nakayama, “Interocularly unpaired zones escape local binocular matching,” Vision Res. 34, 1875–1881 (1994).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

G. E. Legge, “Binocular contrast summation-1,” Vision Res. 24, 373–383 (1983).
[CrossRef]

W. Makous, D. Teller, R. Boothe, “Binocular interaction in the dark,” Vision Res. 16, 473–476 (1976).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

Other

M. Emoto, T. Mitsuhashi, “Perception of edge sharpness in three dimensional images,” in Human Vision, Visual Processing, and Digital Display VI, B. E. Rogowitz, J. P. Allebach, eds., Proc. SPIE2411, 250–261 (1995).
[CrossRef]

J. A. Swets, ed., Signal Detection and Recognition by Human Observers: Contemporary Readings (Wiley, New York, 1964).

H. R. Blackwell, “Psychophysical thresholds: experimental studies of methods of measurement,” (University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich., 1953).

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

Half-occluded region B. Assume that there exist two planes with different depths; then only the right eye can see the half-occluded region B beside the vertical edge.

Fig. 2
Fig. 2

Top view of experimental apparatus. Two frame memories and HDTV monitors were used to present stimuli for left and right eyes. Rays from a CRT were polarized at right angles to each other, and observers wearing polarizing glasses could perceive dichoptic stimuli with depth.

Fig. 3
Fig. 3

Background images and monocular small gray dot target. Background images consisted of two concentric rectangles: The larger one is 300×300 pixels with 5.33 cd m-2 luminance, and the smaller one is 200×200 pixels with 8.05 cd m-2. The small gray dot target was presented beside the vertical border of the two concentric rectangles superimposing on the background images.

Fig. 4
Fig. 4

Prefusion conditions and observers’ perceptions. (a) 3D condition: The smaller rectangle of the right image was shifted left so that observers could perceive it as nearer than the larger rectangle. (b) 2D condition: Left and right images were identical. Observers perceive them as one plane. (c) Monocular condition: The image was presented to only one eye as a control.

Fig. 5
Fig. 5

The inconstancy between accommodation and vergence. (a) When the observer looks at a real object, our accommodation point is consistent with vergence point that is at the real object. (b) When the observer looks at a stereoscopic display such as this experimental apparatus, our vergence point is at the cross point of the visual axes but the accommodation point is at the screen surface.

Fig. 6
Fig. 6

Log contrast versus log detectability d for 3D (squares), 2D (bars), and monocular (circles) condition of the trial experiment. The cross point of the inclined regression line and of the horizontal line with d=1 represents contrast threshold C.

Fig. 7
Fig. 7

Log contrast versus log detectability d for 3D (squares), 2D (bars), and monocular (circles) condition. The cross point of the inclined regression line and of the horizontal line with d=1 represents contrast threshold C.

Fig. 8
Fig. 8

Contrast threshold C for each condition of the left eye of subject A (filled triangles), subject D (filled circles), subject K (filled diamonds), and subject K of the trial experiment (filled squares). Open symbols are for the right eye of each subject.

Fig. 9
Fig. 9

Log contrast versus log detectability d for 3D (squares), 2D (bars), and monocular (circles) condition of the summed left and right data.

Fig. 10
Fig. 10

Contrast threshold C for each condition of the left eye of subject A (triangles), subject D (circles), and subject K (diamonds) of the summed left and right data.

Tables (2)

Tables Icon

Table 1 Threshold Contrast C, Slope n, and Correlation Coefficient R2 of Regression Line for Each Condition

Tables Icon

Table 2 Threshold Contrast C, Slope n, and Correlation Coefficient R2 of the Regression Line of Summed Left and Right Data

Equations (1)

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

d=(C/C)n,

Metrics