4.3 Article

Combining achromatic and chromatic cues to transparency

期刊

JOURNAL OF VISION
卷 6, 期 8, 页码 760-776

出版社

ASSOC RESEARCH VISION OPHTHALMOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1167/6.8.1

关键词

transparency; luminance; equiluminant color; cue combination

资金

  1. NEI NIH HHS [EY08266] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE [R01EY008266] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigated how achromatic and chromatic cues interact to produce transparency. Observers were shown six-region stimulus displays similar to those used by R. Kasrai and F. A. A. Kingdom ( 2001) and made adjustments of the color and luminance attributes of one of the filter regions to achieve the best percept of transparency. The dependent measure of primary interest was setting reliability, the reciprocal of setting variance. We wished to determine whether the combination of chromatic and achromatic information leads to enhanced reliability of perceived transparency. In Experiment 1, we measured reliability for achromatic, L, superimposed luminance with color, L + C, and superimposed luminance with polarity-reversing color, L + iC. We found that observers' reliability was highest for the L + C condition, consistent with effective cue combination. In a second experiment, we compared setting reliability for L, L + C, and a new chromatic-only condition C. In the L + C condition, observers were asked to make separate and iterative settings of luminance and color to achieve the best percept of transparency. We compared their settings in L with the luminance settings in L + C and their settings in C with their color settings in L + C. Color adjustments were more reliable when accompanied by luminance information but not vice versa. In Experiment 3, we manipulated the transmittance of the achromatic and chromatic filters separately and investigated how this influences the settings made for each attribute. No systematic influence of filter transmittance on the settings made for perceived transparency was found.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据