Depth propagation and surface construction in 3-D vision

In stereo vision, regions with ambiguous or unspecified disparity can acquire perceived depth from unambiguous regions. This has been called stereo capture, depth interpolation or surface completion. We studied some striking induced depth effects suggesting that depth interpolation and surface completion are distinct stages of visual processing. An inducing texture (2-D Gaussian noise) had sinusoidal modulation of disparity, creating a smooth horizontal corrugation. The central region of this surface was replaced by various test patterns whose perceived corrugation was measured. When the test image was horizontal 1-D noise, shown to one eye or to both eyes without disparity, it appeared corrugated in much the same way as the disparity-modulated (DM) flanking regions. But when the test image was 2-D noise, or vertical 1-D noise, little or no depth was induced. This suggests that horizontal orientation was a key factor. For a horizontal sine-wave luminance grating, strong depth was induced, but for a square-wave grating, depth was induced only when its edges were aligned with the peaks and troughs of the DM flanking surface. These and related results suggest that disparity (or local depth) propagates along horizontal 1-D features, and then a 3-D surface is constructed from the depth samples acquired. The shape of the constructed surface can be different from the inducer, and so surface construction appears to operate on the results of a more local depth propagation process.

Can aberrometry provide rapid and reliable measures of subjective depth of focus following multifocal intraocular lens implantation?

Purpose: To determine whether the ‘through-focus’ aberrations of a multifocal and accommodative intraocular lens (IOL) implanted patient can be used to provide rapid and reliable measures of their subjective range of clear vision. Methods: Eyes that had been implanted with a concentric (n = 8), segmented (n = 10) or accommodating (n = 6) intraocular lenses (mean age 62.9 ± 8.9 years; range 46-79 years) for over a year underwent simultaneous monocular subjective (electronic logMAR test chart at 4m with letters randomised between presentations) and objective (Aston open-field aberrometer) defocus curve testing for levels of defocus between +1.50 to -5.00DS in -0.50DS steps, in a randomised order. Pupil size and ocular aberration (a combination of the patient’s and the defocus inducing lens aberrations) at each level of blur was measured by the aberrometer. Visual acuity was measured subjectively at each level of defocus to determine the traditional defocus curve. Objective acuity was predicted using image quality metrics. Results: The range of clear focus differed between the three IOL types (F=15.506, P=0.001) as well as between subjective and objective defocus curves (F=6.685, p=0.049). There was no statistically significant difference between subjective and objective defocus curves in the segmented or concentric ring MIOL group (P>0.05). However a difference was found between the two measures and the accommodating IOL group (P<0.001). Mean Delta logMAR (predicted minus measured logMAR) across all target vergences was -0.06 ± 0.19 logMAR. Predicted logMAR defocus curves for the multifocal IOLs did not show a near vision addition peak, unlike the subjective measurement of visual acuity. However, there was a strong positive correlation between measured and predicted logMAR for all three IOLs (Pearson’s correlation: P<0.001). Conclusions: Current subjective procedures are lengthy and do not enable important additional measures such as defocus curves under differently luminance or contrast levels to be assessed, which may limit our understanding of MIOL performance in real-world conditions. In general objective aberrometry measures correlated well with the subjective assessment indicating the relative robustness of this technique in evaluating post-operative success with segmented and concentric ring MIOL.