When two images are combined three perceptual outcomes are possible. One, they can be perceived as they are—separate and independent images. Two, they can become perceptually fused into a new image. Three, one image may dominate, or mask, the other. These possibilities are demonstrated with a variety of images and it is proposed that it is their spatial correlation rather than their spatial frequency similarities or differences which is critical in determining the particular outcome.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CaelliT, 1983“Energy processing and coding factors in texture discrimination and image processing”Perception & Psychophysics34349–355
2.
CaelliTBevanP, 1982“Visual sensitivity to two-dimensional spatial phase”Journal of the Optical Society of America721375–1381
3.
CaelliTJuleszB, 1979“On psychophysical evidence for global feature processing in visual texture discrimination”Journal of the Optical Society of America69675–678
4.
HallE L, 1979Computer Image Processing and Recognition (New York: Academic Press)
5.
HarmonLJuleszB, 1973“Masking in visual recognition: Effects of two-dimensional filtered noise”Science1801194–1197
6.
HübnerMRentschlerIEnckeW, 1985“Hidden-face recognition: Comparing foveal and extrafoveal performance”Human Neurobiology41–8
7.
MorroneCBurrDRossJ, 1983“Added noise restores recognizability of coarse quantized images”Nature (London)305226–228
8.
StromeyerCJuleszB, 1972“Spatial frequency masking in vision: Critical bands and the spread of masking”Journal of the Optical Society of America621221–1232
