Complementary colors theory of color vision: Physiology, color mixture, color constancy and color perception

Abstract

I describe complementary colors' physiology and functional roles in color vision, in a three-stage theory (receptor, opponent color, and complementary color stages). 40 specific roles include the complementary structuring of: S and L cones, opponent single cells, cardinal directions, hue cycle structure, hue constancy, trichromatic color mixture, additive/subtractive primaries, two unique hues, color mixture space, uniform hue difference, lightness-, saturation-, and wavelength/huediscrimination, spectral sensitivity, chromatic adaptation, metamerism, chromatic induction, Helson-Judd effect, colored shadows, color rendering, warm-cool colors, brilliance, color harmony, Aristotle's flight of colors, whiteblack responsivity, Helmholtz-Kohlrausch effect, rainbows/halos/glories, dichromatism, spectral-sharpening, and trimodality of functions (RGB peaks, CMY troughs whose complementarism adapts functions to illuminant). The 40 specific roles fall into 3 general roles: color mixture, color constancy, and color perception. Complementarism evidently structures much of the visual process. Its physiology is evident in complementarism of cones, and opponent single cells in retina, LGN, and cortex. Genetics show our first cones were S and L, which are complementary in daylight D65, giving a standard white to aid chromatic adaptation. M cone later split from L to oppose the nonspectral (red and purple) hues mixed from SþL. Response curves and wavelength peaks of cones L, S, and (SþL), M, closely resemble, and lead to, those of opponent-color chromatic responses y, b, and r, g, a bimodal system whose summation gives spectral-sharpened trimodal complementarism (RGB peaks, CMY troughs). Spectral sharpening demands a post-receptoral, post-opponent-colors location, hence a third stage.

A Perception-Based Model of Complementary Afterimages

“…The acceptance of the opponent model of afterimages is likely due to three factors that originate in the 1960s (Lang, 1987;Pridmore, 2011): Hurvich's revival of Hering's opponent color theory (Hering, 1964;Hurvich, 1981;Hurvich & Jameson, 1957;Jameson & Hurvich, 1961), the findings about the alleged neural underpinning of color opponency (Daw, 1967;De Valois, 1965;Svaetichin & MacNichol, 1958), and the popularity of multistage theory of color perception that combined RGB and color opponency (De Valois & De Valois, 1993;Solomon & Lennie, 2007). Some of these findings are currently under scrutiny (Pridmore, 2011;Romney, D'Andrade, & Indow, 2005;Stoughton & Conway, 2008;Valberg, 2001).…”

Cone Photoreceptor Sensitivities and Unique Hue Chromatic Responses: Correlation and Causation Imply the Physiological Basis of Unique Hues

“…The early multistage color vision models (5,6) conceived the opponent-color chromatic response functions, r-g and y-b . These functions were further developed by later models [8], [9], [11], [36], [37], [38], [39], [40], [41] and were broadly confirmed by hue cancellation experiments (below). The models derive chromatic responses from combinations of cone responses as shown in Fig.…”

“…2 and 3), varying from red at one spectrum end, through purples to violet at the other spectrum end. Given the opponent or complementary nature of color vision, the red and nonspectral hues arose probably [41] to oppose or complement the green hues generated by the evolving M cone as it joined the earlier S and L cones [61] to produce trichromatic vision.…”

“…4. A different combination used in a recent model [41] inputs S cone directly to b chromatic response, M directly to g , and L directly to y , from the author noting the similarity of wavelength peaks in the data. The Standard Model similarly inputs S cone directly to b chromatic response, and M directly to g , but inputs L + M to y chromatic response.…”

“…Ingling [36] claimed his model was justified by conflict between hue cancellation data and direct hue matching [42] but his model was later [43] shown to be erroneous by CIE colorimetry; in effect, Ingling was using a very desaturated, almost flat-lined, version of the b stimulus curve. Omitting these flawed models, the simplest effective models in Table 1 seem to be those in Refs [8], [9], [41]. These models minimize or omit M cone input to y chromatic response (see Fig.…”