Lightness of a grey target on a uniform light (or dark) surround changes by articulating the surround (articulation effect). To elucidate the processing of lightness underlying the articulation effect, the present study introduced transparency over a dark surround and investigated its effects on lightness of the target. The transparency was produced by adding a contiguous external field to the dark surround while keeping local stimulus configuration constant. Results showed that the target lightness did not change on the articulated surround when a dark transparent filter was perceived over the target, although it did on the uniform surround. These results suggest that image decomposition into a transparent filter and an underlying surface does not necessarily change lightness of the surface if the surface is articulated. Moreover, the present study revealed that articulating the surround does not always enhance lightness contrast; it can reduce the contrast effect when the target luminance is not the highest within the surround. These findings are consistent with the theoretical view that lightness perception on articulated surfaces is determined locally within a spatially limited region, and they also place a constraint on how the luminance distribution within the limited region is scaled.
AdelsonE. H. (2000). Lightness perception and lightness illusions. In GazzanigaM (Ed.), The new cognitive neuroscience (2nd ed, pp. 339–351). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
AndersonB. L.WinawerJ. (2008). Layered image representations and the computation of surface lightness. Journal of Vision, 8(7):18, 1–22. From http://journalofvision.org/8/7/18/, doi:10.1167/8.7.18.
4.
ArendL. E.ReevesA. (1986). Simultaneous color constancy. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 3, 1743–1751. doi:10.1364/JOSAA.3.001743.
5.
BarrowH. G.TenenbaumJ. (1978). Recovering intrinsic scene characteristics from images. In HansonA. R.RisemanE. M. (Eds.), Computer vision systems (pp. 3–26). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
6.
BrainardD. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433–436. doi:10.1163/156856897X00357.
7.
BressanP.Actis-GrossoR. (2006). Simultaneous lightness contrast on plain and articulated surrounds. Perception, 35, 445–452. doi:10.1068/p5247.
8.
EconomouE.ZdravkovicS.GilchristA. (2007). Anchoring versus spatial filtering accounts of simultaneous lightness contrast. Journal of Vision, 7(12):2, 1–15. From: http://journalofvision.org/7/12/2/, doi:10.1167/7.12.2.
9.
GilchristA.DelmanS.JacobsenA. (1983). The classification and integration of edges as critical to the perception of reflectance and illumination. Perception & Psychophysics, 33, 425–436. doi:10.3758/BF03202893.
10.
GilchristA.KossyfidisCBonatoF.AgostiniT.CataliottiJ.LiX. (1999). An anchoring theory of lightness perception. Psychological Review, 106, 795–834. doi:10.1037//0033-295X.106.4.795.
11.
GilchristA. L.AnnanV.Jr. (2002). Articulation effects in lightness: Historical background and theoretical implications. Perception, 31, 141–150. doi:10.1068/p04sp.
12.
HeinemannE. G. (1955). Simultaneous brightness induction as a function of inducing and test-field luminances. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50, 89–96. doi:10.1037/h0040919.
13.
KingdomF. A. A.BlakesleeB.McCourtM. E. (1997). Brightness with and without perceived transparency: When does it make a difference?Perception, 26, 493–506. doi:10.1068/p260493.
14.
LandE. H.McCannJ. J. (1971). Lightness and retinex theory. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 61, 1–11. doi:10.1364/JOSA.61.000001.
15.
LottoR. B.PurvesD. (1999). The effects of color on brightness. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 1010–1014. doi:10.1038/14808.
16.
PelliD. G. (1997). The Video Toolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10, 437–442. doi:10.1163/156856897X00366.
RutherfordM. D.BrainardD. H. (2002). Lightness constancy: A direct test of the illumination-estimation hypothesis. Psychological Science, 13, 142–149. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00426.
19.
SchirilloJ. A. (1999a). Surround articulation. I. Brightness judgments. Journal of the Optical Society of America A. Optics, Image Science, and Vision, 16, 793–803. doi:10.1364/JOSAA.16.000793.
20.
SchirilloJ. A. (1999b). Surround articulation. II. Lightness judgments. Journal of the Optical Society of America A. Optics, Image Science, and Vision, 16, 804–811. doi:10.1364/JOSAA.16.000804.
21.
SchirilloJ. A.ShevellS. K. (1996). Brightness contrast from inhomogeneous surrounds. Vision Research, 36, 1783–1796. doi:10.1016/0042-6989(95)00217-0.
22.
SchirilloJ. A.ShevellS. K. (1997). An account of brightness in complex scenes based on inferred illumination. Perception, 26, 507–518. doi:10.1068/p260507.
23.
SchirilloJ. A.ShevellS. K. (2002). Articulation: Brightness, apparent illumination, and contrast ratios. Perception, 31, 161–169. doi:10.1068/p09sp.
SoranzoA.AgostiniT. (2006b). Photometric, geometric, and perceptual factors in illumination-independent lightness constancy. Perception and Psychophysics, 68, 102–113. doi:10.3758/BF03193660.
26.
SpeharB.CliffordC. W. G.AgostiniT. (2002). Induction in variants of White's effect: Common or separate mechanisms?Perception, 31, 189–196. doi:10.1068/p10sp.
27.
SpeharB.DebonetJ. S.ZaidiQ. (1996). Brightness induction from uniform and complex surrounds: A general model. Vision Research, 36, 1893–1906. doi:10.1016/0042-6989(95)00255-3.
28.
TodorovićD. (2006). Lightness, illumination, and gradients. Spatial Vision, 19, 219–261.
29.
Von HelmholtzH. (1866/2000). Helmholtz's treatise on physiological optics. SouthallJ. P. C. (Ed.), Bristol, England: Thoemmes Press.
30.
WallachH. (1948). Brightness constancy and the nature of achromatic colors. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 310–324. doi:10.1037/h0053804.
31.
ZavagnoD. (2005). The phantom illumination illusion. Perception and Psychophysics, 67, 209–218. doi:10.3758/BF03206485.