Search

The perception of color poses daunting challenges, because the light spectrum reaching the eye depends on both the reflectance of objects and the spectrum of the illuminating light source. Solving this problem requires sophisticated inferences about the properties of lighting and surfaces, and many striking examples of 'color constancy' illustrate how our vision compensates for variations in illumination to estimate the color of objects (for example [1-3]). We discovered a novel property of color perception and constancy, involving how we experience shades of blue versus yellow. We found that surfaces are much more likely to be perceived as white or gray when their color is varied along bluish directions, compared with equivalent variations along yellowish (or reddish or greenish) directions. This selective bias may reflect a tendency to attribute bluish tints to the illuminant rather than the object, consistent with an inference that indirect lighting from the sky and in shadows tends to be bluish. The blue-yellow asymmetry has striking effects on the appearance of images when their colors are reversed, turning white to yellow and silver to gold, and helps account for the variation among observers in the colors experienced in 'the dress' image that recently consumed the internet. Observers variously describe the dress as blue-black or white-gold, and this has been explained by whether the dress appears to be in direct lighting or shade (for example [5]). We show that these individual differences and potential lighting interpretations also depend on the special ambiguity of blue, for simply reversing the image colors causes almost all observers to report the lighter stripes as yellowish., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The two eyes of an individual routinely differ in their optical and neural properties, yet percepts through either eye remain more similar than predicted by these differences. Little is known as to how the brain resolves this conflicting information. Differences in visual inputs from the two eyes have been studied extensively in the context of binocular vision and rivalry [1], but it remains unknown how the visual system calibrates and corrects for normal variability in image quality between the eyes, and whether this correction is applied to each eye separately or after their signals have converged. To test this, we used adaptive optics to control and manipulate the blur projected on each retina, and then compared judgments of image focus through either eye and how these judgments were biased by adapting to different levels of blur. Despite significant interocular differences in the magnitude of optical blur, the blur level that appeared best focused was the same through both eyes, and corresponded to the ocular blur of the less aberrated eye. Moreover, for both eyes, blur aftereffects depended on whether the adapting blur was stronger or weaker than the native blur of the better eye, with no aftereffect when the blur equaled the aberrations of the better eye. Our results indicate that the neural calibration for the perception of image focus reflects a single 'cyclopean' site that is set monocularly by the eye with better optical quality. Consequently, what people regard as 'best-focused' matches the blur encountered through the eye with better optics, even when judging the world through the eye with poorer optics., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)