Literature DB >> 2771346

Effect of defocus on blur thresholds and on thresholds of perceived change in blur: comparison of source and observer methods.

R J Jacobs1, G Smith, C D Chan.   

Abstract

The defocus levels required for normal observers to notice the first perceptible blur of a clear test target (blur threshold) and the least perceptible change in the degree of blurriness of an already blurry target (threshold of perceived change in blur) were measured using both the source and observer methods. In the source method observers viewed defocused stimuli presented on a projection screen, whereas in the observer method focused stimuli were presented to observers who were defocused using lenses placed in the spectacle plane. Blur thresholds were found to be dependent on target size and when the Landolt ring targets were near threshold acuity size blur thresholds were as small as 0.10 D. For larger target sizes (0.6 log min arc or more above threshold acuity size) the blur thresholds remained relatively unchanged and were about 0.18 D. Thresholds of perceived change in blur were found to be independent of the initial defocus level. Measurements of the threshold of perceived change in blur were found to be 0.05 to 0.07 D, which is much smaller than the blur threshold values. Comparison of results from the two methods of producing defocus indicate that the source and observer methods can be used interchangeably. However, for the same angular blur disc diameter, the blur thresholds found with the source method were significantly lower than those found with the observer method.

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2771346     DOI: 10.1097/00006324-198908000-00010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Optom Vis Sci        ISSN: 1040-5488            Impact factor:   1.973


  11 in total

1.  Focus information is used to interpret binocular images.

Authors:  David M Hoffman; Martin S Banks
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2010-05-01       Impact factor: 2.240

2.  A relationship between tolerance of blur and personality.

Authors:  Russell L Woods; C Randall Colvin; Fuensanta A Vera-Diaz; Eli Peli
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2010-05-26       Impact factor: 4.799

3.  Six just-noticeable differences in retinal image quality in 1 line of visual acuity: toward quantification of happy versus unhappy patients with 20/20 acuity.

Authors:  Ayeswarya Ravikumar; Raymond A Applegate; Yue Shi; Harold E Bedell
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 3.351

4.  Blur and disparity are complementary cues to depth.

Authors:  Robert T Held; Emily A Cooper; Martin S Banks
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2012-02-09       Impact factor: 10.834

Review 5.  Retinal-image mediated ocular growth as a mechanism for juvenile onset myopia and for emmetropization. A literature review.

Authors:  D A Goss; M G Wickham
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 2.379

6.  Minimum change in spherical aberration that can be perceived.

Authors:  Silvestre Manzanera; Pablo Artal
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2016-08-15       Impact factor: 3.732

7.  Blur perception throughout the visual field in myopia and emmetropia.

Authors:  Guido Maiello; Lenna Walker; Peter J Bex; Fuensanta A Vera-Diaz
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2017-05-01       Impact factor: 2.240

8.  The effect of refractive surgery on blur thresholds.

Authors:  Rachapalle Reddi Sudhir; Hadiya Farhath Pattan; Mehal Rathore; Mohana Kuppuswamy Parthasarathy; Prema Padmanabhan; Vasudevan Lakshminarayanan
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 1.848

9.  Why do animal eyes have pupils of different shapes?

Authors:  Martin S Banks; William W Sprague; Jürgen Schmoll; Jared A Q Parnell; Gordon D Love
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2015-08-07       Impact factor: 14.136

10.  Blur Unblurred-A Mini Tutorial.

Authors:  Hans Strasburger; Michael Bach; Sven P Heinrich
Journal:  Iperception       Date:  2018-04-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.