Contrast sensitivity function and image discrimination.

A previous study tested the validity of simulations of the appearance of a natural image (from different observation distances) generated by using a visual model and contrast sensitivity functions of the individual observers [J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 13, 1131 (1996)]. Deleting image spatial-frequency components that should be undetectable made the simulations indistinguishable from the original images at distances larger than the simulated distance. The simulated observation distance accurately predicted the distance at which the simulated image could be discriminated from the original image. Owing to the 1/f characteristic of natural images' spatial spectra, the individual contrast sensitivity functions (CSF's) used in the simulations of the previous study were actually tested only over a narrow range of retinal spatial frequencies. To test the CSF's over a wide range of frequencies, the same simulations and testing procedure were applied to five contrast versions of the images (10-300%). This provides a stronger test of the model, of the simulations, and specifically of the CSF's used. The relevant CSF for a discrimination task was found to be obtained by using 1-octave Gabor stimuli measured in a contrast detection task. The relevant CSF data had to be measured over a range of observation distances, owing to limitations of the displays.

[1]  J. Robson,et al.  Application of fourier analysis to the visibility of gratings , 1968, The Journal of physiology.

[2]  G. F. Cooper,et al.  The spatial selectivity of the visual cells of the cat , 1969, The Journal of physiology.

[3]  Arthur P Ginsburg,et al.  Visual Information Processing Based on Spatial Filters Constrained by Biological Data. , 1978 .

[4]  G. Lennerstrand,et al.  PICTURE SIMULATION OF CONTRAST SENSITIVITY IN ORGANIC AND FUNCTIONAL AMBLYOPIA , 1981, Acta ophthalmologica.

[5]  M S Banks,et al.  The development of contrast constancy. , 1985, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[6]  George C. Woo,et al.  Low Vision , 1987, Springer New York.

[7]  D J Field,et al.  Relations between the statistics of natural images and the response properties of cortical cells. , 1987, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[8]  Andrew B. Watson,et al.  The cortex transform: rapid computation of simulated neural images , 1987 .

[9]  Leland S. Stone,et al.  Halftoning method for the generation of motion stimuli , 1989 .

[10]  E. Peli Contrast in complex images. , 1990, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[11]  E. Peli,et al.  Image enhancement for the visually impaired. Simulations and experimental results. , 1991, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[12]  Eli Peli,et al.  Display nonlinearity in digital image processing for visual communications , 1991, Other Conferences.

[13]  E. Peli,et al.  Image invariance with changes in size: the role of peripheral contrast thresholds. , 1991, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[14]  D. Tolhurst,et al.  Amplitude spectra of natural images. , 1992, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[15]  Scott J. Daly,et al.  Visible differences predictor: an algorithm for the assessment of image fidelity , 1992, Electronic Imaging.

[16]  D. Tolhurst,et al.  Amplitude spectra of natural images , 1992 .

[17]  William Bialek,et al.  Statistics of Natural Images: Scaling in the Woods , 1993, NIPS.

[18]  E Peli,et al.  Contrast sensitivity to patch stimuli: effects of spatial bandwidth and temporal presentation. , 1993, Spatial vision.

[19]  D. Tolhurst,et al.  Discrimination of changes in the second-order statistics of natural and synthetic images , 1994, Vision Research.

[20]  D. Field,et al.  What's constant in contrast constancy? The effects of scaling on the perceived contrast of bandpass patterns , 1995, Vision Research.

[21]  Hugh R. Wilson,et al.  QUANTITATIVE MODELS FOR PATTERN DETECTION AND DISCRIMINATION , 1995 .

[22]  Miguel A. García-Pérez,et al.  VISUAL PROCESSING IN THE JOINT SPATIAL/SPATIAL-FREQUENCY DOMAIN , 1995 .

[23]  Eli Peli,et al.  SIMULATING NORMAL AND LOW VISION , 1995 .

[24]  Jeffrey Lubin,et al.  A VISUAL DISCRIMINATION MODEL FOR IMAGING SYSTEM DESIGN AND EVALUATION , 1995 .

[25]  E Peli,et al.  Test of a model of foveal vision by using simulations. , 1996, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[26]  D. Tolhurst,et al.  Band-limited contrast in natural images explains the detectability of changes in the amplitude spectra , 1997, Vision Research.

[27]  E. Peli,et al.  26.4: Artifacts of CRT Displays in Vision Research and Other Critical Applications , 2000 .