Abstract

An achromatic surface in a complex scene has both an apparent reflectance attribute (lightness) and an overall intensitive attribute (brightness). We studied changes of these two attributes as a function of changes in illumination level and pattern complexity. Subjects observed simultaneously two arrays of simulated achromatic surfaces with identical reflectance distributions. The left-hand array (standard) was always illuminated at a moderate level. The right-hand array (test) had different illuminances from trial to trial. The subjects adjusted patches in the test array to match the corresponding patches in the standard array in either lightness or brightness. In complex patterns (32grays) lightness constancy was nearly perfect; test reflectance settings were invariant over illuminance. In disk/annulus patterns (two grays), the lightness-match data confirmed previously published reports. At high illuminances, the standard patches could be matched with a smaller range of test-array reflectances than at low illuminances, i.e., lightness constancy was imperfect. Brightness matches varied substantially as a function of illuminance in all conditions.

© 1987 Optical Society of America

Full Article  |  PDF Article

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |
  • |

  1. For a review of this large literature see E. G. Heineman, “Simultaneous brightness induction,” in Handbook of Sensory Physiology, D. Jameson, L. M. Hurvich, eds. (Springer, New York, 1972), Vol. 4, pp. 146–168.
    [CrossRef]
  2. D. Jameson, L. M. Hurvich, “Complexities of perceived brightness,” Science 133, 174–179 (1961).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. H. R. Flock, K. Noguchi, “An experimental test of Jameson and Hurvich’s theory of brightness contrast,” Percept. Psychophys. 8, 129–136 (1970).
  4. K. Noguchi, N. Masuda, “Brightness changes in a complex field with changing illumination: a re-examination of Jameson and Hurvich’s study of brightness constancy,” Jpn. Psychol. Res. 13, 60–69 (1971).
  5. A. Jacobsen, “The perception of lightness in achromatic surfaces,” Ph.D. dissertation (State University of New York at Stony Brook, New York, 1984);
  6. A. Jacobsen, A. Gilchrist, “The ratio principal holds over a million-to-one range,” Percept. Psychophys. (to be published).
  7. R. M. EvansThe Perception of Color (Wiley, New York, 1974). Both definitions are exact quotations, but Evans might not accept application of the term “brightness” to subareas of a scene. This reference presents systematic, detailed discussion of the complexities of color appearance in achromatic scenes.
  8. L. E. Arend, A. Reeves, “Simultaneous color constancy,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 3, 1743–1751 (1986).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. E. H. Land, J. J. McCann, “Lightness and retinex theory,”J. Opt. Soc. Am. 61, 1–11 (1971).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. G. Wyszecki, W. S. Stiles, Color Science (Wiley, New York, 1982).
  11. Details of apparatus and calibration have been presented elsewhere.7
  12. Most data on simultaneous contrast as a function of separation of fields (e.g., Leibowitz et al.13) show that interactions should be weak at our 2.1-deg minimum separation.
  13. H. Leibowitz, F. A. Mote, W. R. Thurlow, “Simultaneous contrast as a function of separation between test and inducing fields,”J. Exp. Psychol. 46, 453–456 (1953).
    [CrossRef]
  14. C. Hess, H. Pretori, “Quantitative investigation of the lawfulness of simultaneous brightness contrast,” translated by H. R. Flock, J. H. Tenney, Percept. Mot. Skills31, 947–969 (1970).
    [CrossRef]

1986 (1)

1971 (2)

E. H. Land, J. J. McCann, “Lightness and retinex theory,”J. Opt. Soc. Am. 61, 1–11 (1971).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

K. Noguchi, N. Masuda, “Brightness changes in a complex field with changing illumination: a re-examination of Jameson and Hurvich’s study of brightness constancy,” Jpn. Psychol. Res. 13, 60–69 (1971).

1970 (1)

H. R. Flock, K. Noguchi, “An experimental test of Jameson and Hurvich’s theory of brightness contrast,” Percept. Psychophys. 8, 129–136 (1970).

1961 (1)

D. Jameson, L. M. Hurvich, “Complexities of perceived brightness,” Science 133, 174–179 (1961).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

1953 (1)

H. Leibowitz, F. A. Mote, W. R. Thurlow, “Simultaneous contrast as a function of separation between test and inducing fields,”J. Exp. Psychol. 46, 453–456 (1953).
[CrossRef]

Arend, L. E.

Evans, R. M.

R. M. EvansThe Perception of Color (Wiley, New York, 1974). Both definitions are exact quotations, but Evans might not accept application of the term “brightness” to subareas of a scene. This reference presents systematic, detailed discussion of the complexities of color appearance in achromatic scenes.

Flock, H. R.

H. R. Flock, K. Noguchi, “An experimental test of Jameson and Hurvich’s theory of brightness contrast,” Percept. Psychophys. 8, 129–136 (1970).

Gilchrist, A.

A. Jacobsen, A. Gilchrist, “The ratio principal holds over a million-to-one range,” Percept. Psychophys. (to be published).

Heineman, E. G.

For a review of this large literature see E. G. Heineman, “Simultaneous brightness induction,” in Handbook of Sensory Physiology, D. Jameson, L. M. Hurvich, eds. (Springer, New York, 1972), Vol. 4, pp. 146–168.
[CrossRef]

Hess, C.

C. Hess, H. Pretori, “Quantitative investigation of the lawfulness of simultaneous brightness contrast,” translated by H. R. Flock, J. H. Tenney, Percept. Mot. Skills31, 947–969 (1970).
[CrossRef]

Hurvich, L. M.

D. Jameson, L. M. Hurvich, “Complexities of perceived brightness,” Science 133, 174–179 (1961).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

Jacobsen, A.

A. Jacobsen, “The perception of lightness in achromatic surfaces,” Ph.D. dissertation (State University of New York at Stony Brook, New York, 1984);

A. Jacobsen, A. Gilchrist, “The ratio principal holds over a million-to-one range,” Percept. Psychophys. (to be published).

Jameson, D.

D. Jameson, L. M. Hurvich, “Complexities of perceived brightness,” Science 133, 174–179 (1961).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

Land, E. H.

Leibowitz, H.

H. Leibowitz, F. A. Mote, W. R. Thurlow, “Simultaneous contrast as a function of separation between test and inducing fields,”J. Exp. Psychol. 46, 453–456 (1953).
[CrossRef]

Masuda, N.

K. Noguchi, N. Masuda, “Brightness changes in a complex field with changing illumination: a re-examination of Jameson and Hurvich’s study of brightness constancy,” Jpn. Psychol. Res. 13, 60–69 (1971).

McCann, J. J.

Mote, F. A.

H. Leibowitz, F. A. Mote, W. R. Thurlow, “Simultaneous contrast as a function of separation between test and inducing fields,”J. Exp. Psychol. 46, 453–456 (1953).
[CrossRef]

Noguchi, K.

K. Noguchi, N. Masuda, “Brightness changes in a complex field with changing illumination: a re-examination of Jameson and Hurvich’s study of brightness constancy,” Jpn. Psychol. Res. 13, 60–69 (1971).

H. R. Flock, K. Noguchi, “An experimental test of Jameson and Hurvich’s theory of brightness contrast,” Percept. Psychophys. 8, 129–136 (1970).

Pretori, H.

C. Hess, H. Pretori, “Quantitative investigation of the lawfulness of simultaneous brightness contrast,” translated by H. R. Flock, J. H. Tenney, Percept. Mot. Skills31, 947–969 (1970).
[CrossRef]

Reeves, A.

Stiles, W. S.

G. Wyszecki, W. S. Stiles, Color Science (Wiley, New York, 1982).

Thurlow, W. R.

H. Leibowitz, F. A. Mote, W. R. Thurlow, “Simultaneous contrast as a function of separation between test and inducing fields,”J. Exp. Psychol. 46, 453–456 (1953).
[CrossRef]

Wyszecki, G.

G. Wyszecki, W. S. Stiles, Color Science (Wiley, New York, 1982).

J. Exp. Psychol. (1)

H. Leibowitz, F. A. Mote, W. R. Thurlow, “Simultaneous contrast as a function of separation between test and inducing fields,”J. Exp. Psychol. 46, 453–456 (1953).
[CrossRef]

J. Opt. Soc. Am. (1)

J. Opt. Soc. Am. A (1)

Jpn. Psychol. Res. (1)

K. Noguchi, N. Masuda, “Brightness changes in a complex field with changing illumination: a re-examination of Jameson and Hurvich’s study of brightness constancy,” Jpn. Psychol. Res. 13, 60–69 (1971).

Percept. Psychophys. (1)

H. R. Flock, K. Noguchi, “An experimental test of Jameson and Hurvich’s theory of brightness contrast,” Percept. Psychophys. 8, 129–136 (1970).

Science (1)

D. Jameson, L. M. Hurvich, “Complexities of perceived brightness,” Science 133, 174–179 (1961).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

Other (8)

For a review of this large literature see E. G. Heineman, “Simultaneous brightness induction,” in Handbook of Sensory Physiology, D. Jameson, L. M. Hurvich, eds. (Springer, New York, 1972), Vol. 4, pp. 146–168.
[CrossRef]

A. Jacobsen, “The perception of lightness in achromatic surfaces,” Ph.D. dissertation (State University of New York at Stony Brook, New York, 1984);

A. Jacobsen, A. Gilchrist, “The ratio principal holds over a million-to-one range,” Percept. Psychophys. (to be published).

R. M. EvansThe Perception of Color (Wiley, New York, 1974). Both definitions are exact quotations, but Evans might not accept application of the term “brightness” to subareas of a scene. This reference presents systematic, detailed discussion of the complexities of color appearance in achromatic scenes.

G. Wyszecki, W. S. Stiles, Color Science (Wiley, New York, 1982).

Details of apparatus and calibration have been presented elsewhere.7

Most data on simultaneous contrast as a function of separation of fields (e.g., Leibowitz et al.13) show that interactions should be weak at our 2.1-deg minimum separation.

C. Hess, H. Pretori, “Quantitative investigation of the lawfulness of simultaneous brightness contrast,” translated by H. R. Flock, J. H. Tenney, Percept. Mot. Skills31, 947–969 (1970).
[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 (3)

Fig. 1
Fig. 1

(a) Diagram of the disk/annulus stimulus. All stimuli are simulations on high-resolution monitor. Both annuli have a simulated reflectance of 0.25. Left-hand-disk reflectance is fixed at one of four values on each trial; the subject adjusts the right-hand disk to match the left-hand disk in lightness or brightness (see text). Illuminance is fixed on the left and varied on the right (19:1 range) over trials. (b) Diagram of the Mondrian stimulus. Patches of standard and test Mondrians both have fixed reflectances on all trials, except for the test patch. The test patch [one of the four bold-outlined patches (c)] is adjusted to match the coresponding patch in the standard Mondrian. (c) Map of reflectances in test and standard Mondrians (to scale, 5 deg × 5 deg visual angle). On each trial one of the four bold-outlined patches in the test Mondrian was adjusted to match its counterpart in the standard Mondrian. All other patches were identical in the two Mondrians.

Fig. 2
Fig. 2

Mean-log reflectance data from subject RG. Each point is the mean of five adjustments. Vertical bars are ±1.0 standard error of the mean-log reflectance. Where the bars are not visible, two standard errors are smaller than the plot symbols. Top panels, Disk/annulus stimuli; bottom panels, Mondrian stimuli; left-hand panels, lightness matches; right-hand panels, brightness matches. Four data sets in each panel are, from bottom to top, matches to 0.05, 0.15, 0.53, and 0.95 reflectance standard patches. Horizontal lines are at the log reflectances of the standard patches being matched. Lines of −1.0 slope indicate luminances of 0.05- and 0.95-reflectance standard patches. The lines intersect at log relative I = 1.0,where the test illuminance equals the standard illuminance.

Fig. 3
Fig. 3

Mean-log reflectance data from subject LA. All details are as in Fig. 2.

Equations (1)

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

L ( p ) = [ I ( p ) I Std ] ( 23.5 0.50 ) R ( p ) ,

Metrics