Partitive mixing of images: A tool for investigating pictorial perception

Journal of the Optical Society of America A: Optics and Image Science, and Vision

Volumn 16, Issue 12, 1999, Pages 2825-2835

  Griffin, Lewis D ^a  

^a ASTON UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0344716685     PISSN: 10847529     EISSN: 15208532     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1364/JOSAA.16.002825     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. N. J. Wade, A Natural History of Vision (MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1998).
2. J. D. Forbes, “Hints towards a classification of colours, ” Philos. Mag. 34 (1948).
3. J. C. Maxwell, “Theory of the perception of colours, ” Trans. R. Scott. Soc. Arts 4, 394-400 (1856).
4. J. C. Maxwell, “The diagram of colours, ” Trans. R. Soc. Edinburgh 21, 275-298 (1857).
5. L. D. Griffin, “Production of psychophysical stimuli by partitive mixing of images, ” Perception 27 (suppl.), 171-172 (1998).
6. J. C. Maxwell, “Theory of compound colours, and the relations of the colours on the spectrum, ” Proc. R. Soc. London 10, 404-409 (1860).
7. J. J. Koenderink, “Color atlas theory, ” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 4, 1314-1321 (1987).
8. P. Turner, “Building a colour image mixing system, ” B. Optom. dissertation (Aston University, Birmingham, England, 1998).
9. S. Lee, G. Wolberg, and S. Y. Shin, “Polymorph: Morphing among multiple images, ” IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 18, 58-71 (1988).
10. Informally, an affine space is a vector space lacking a point singled out as the origin; a familiar example is the space of equally luminous colors depicted in the CIE diagram. Formally, it is a space of points with an associated vector space and two permissible operations: (i) One may form the difference of two points, which is a vector in the associated vector space, and (ii) one may add any vector to any point to form a new point. However, unlike for a vector space, one cannot multiply a point by a scalar nor add together two points.
11. P. E. Debevec and J. Malik, “Recovering high dynamic range radiance maps from photographs, ” in Proceedings of the Special Interest Group on Graphics’97 (Proc. SIGGRAPH’97) (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1997), pp. 369-378.
12. V. Ronchi, “Resolving power of calculated and reflected images, ” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 51, 458-460 (1961).
13. J. J. Gordon and R. A. Holub, “On the use of linear transformations for scanner calibration, ” Color Res. Appl. 18, 218-219 (1993).
14. B. A. Wandell, “Color rendering of color camera data, ” Color Res. Appl. 11, S30-S33 (1986).
15. S. A. Shafer, “Describing light mixtures through linear algebra, ” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 72, 299-300 (1982).
16. A. J. den Dekker and A. ven den Bos, “Resolution: A survey, ” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 14, 547-557 (1997).
17. Z. Yaumauti, “The light flux distribution of a system of inter-reflecting surfaces, ” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 13, 561-571 (1926).
18. J. J. Koenderink and A. J. van Doorn, “Geometrical modes as a method to treat diffuse inter-reflections in radiometry, ” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 73, 843-850 (1983).
19. C. M. Goral, K. E. Torrance, D. P. Greenberg, and B. Battaile, “Modelling the interaction of light between diffuse surfaces, ” Comput. Graph. 18, 212-222 (1984).
20. B. V. Funt, M. S. Drew, and J. Hio, “Color constancy from mutual reflection, ” Int. J. Comput. Vision 6, 5-24 (1991).
21. F. E. Nicodemus, J. C. Richmond, J. J. Hsia, I. W. Ginsberg, and T. Limperis, “Geometrical considerations and nomenclature for reflectance, ” NBS Monograph 160 (National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C., 1977).
22. J. J. Koenderink and A. J. van Doorn, “Phenomenological description of bidirectional surface reflection, ” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 15, 2903-2912 (1998).
23. If the basis images were out of focus (and so blurred), for example, then an sp mixture that had zero-valued pixels could not correspond to any object.
24. A. J. van Doorn, “Effects of changing context on shape perception, ” Perception 27, S117 (1998).
25. D. H. Brainard, M. D. Rutherford, and J. M. Kraft, “Colour constancy compared: Experiments with real images and color monitors, ” Invest. Ophthalmol. Visual Sci. 38, S2206 (1997).
26. A. Hurlbert, “Illusions and reality checking on the small screen, ” Perception 27, 633-636 (1998).
27. R. L. Savoy, “Colour constancy with reflected and emitted light, ” Perception 22S, 61 (1993).
28. The psychological distinctness of “it looks X” and “it can be seen as X” was noted by Wittgenstein (Ref. 29). An example of the difference is in regard to the threedimensionality of line drawings. Suppose that one is examining a straightforward sketch of a cube (which one recognizes as such), and is asked “Does it look threedimensional?” One could reasonably answer either yes or no. In contrast, “Can you see it as three-dimensional?” could reasonably only be answered yes. “Reasonably” here should be understood as “speaking the same language.”
29. L. Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations (Blackwells, Oxford, U.K., 1953).
30. E. Schrödinger, “Theorie der Pigmente von grosster Leuchtkraft, ” Ann. Phys. 62, 603-622 (1920).
31. R. M. Evans, “Fluorescence and gray content of surface colors, ” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 49, 1049-1059 (1959).
32. J. M. Spiegle and D. H. Brainard, “Luminosity thresholds: Effect of test chromaticity and ambient illumination, ” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 13, 436-451 (1996).
33. G. Wyszecki, “Correlate for lightness in terms of CIE chromaticity co-ordinates and luminous reflectance, ” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 57, 254-257 (1967).
34. M. D. Fairchild and E. Pirrotta, “Predicting the lightness of chromatic object colours using CIELAB, ” Col. Res. Appl. 16, 385-393 (1991).