Purchase this article with an account.
Hao Sun, Joel Pokorny, Vivianne C. Smith; Brightness induction from rods. Journal of Vision 2001;1(1):4. doi: https://doi.org/10.1167/1.1.4.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
Rod modulation of an annular surround can produce brightness contrast in a test field centered at 10° from the fovea. In our research, stimuli originated from a colorimeter that provided 4 primaries in both the circular test and the annular surround fields, and allowed independent modulation of the rods and each of the short (S)-, middle (M)-, and long (L)-wavelength-sensitive cone types. The chromaticity was set so fields had the same appearance as the equal energy spectrum. At 1 photopic troland (td), rod-induced modulation in the test field could be cancelled by either a rod- or a cone-nulling modulation added to the test field. The best cone nulling of rod induction showed residual flicker. Nulling was more effective, though still imperfect, with a cone-nulling stimulus of higher S-cone modulation contrast. Rod induction with square-wave, on-pulse, and off-pulse temporal profiles was closely similar. At higher light levels, 10 and 100 td, rod contrast could not be nulled by rod or cone modulation. The failure to achieve nulls may have been caused by either or both of the following hypotheses: (1) there is a mismatch between the rod and cone temporal waveforms; (2) there is strong rod input to the magnocellular pathway, but negligible rod input to the parvocellular pathway, as shown by single-unit electrophysiological data.
All fits except one have an R value between 0.95 and 0.99.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only