&lt;title&gt;Luminance contrast and color recognition in helmet-mounted displays&lt;/title&gt;

Havig, Paul R.; Grigsby, Scott S.; Heft, Eric L.; LaCreta, John M.; Post, David L.

doi:10.1117/12.437995

Cited by 12 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We previously reported minimum luminance contrast ratios obtained when observers made a subjective judgment of their ability to recognize a color by stopping the incremental increase in contrast ratio of a colored symbology (1). That study used the same three target colors on the same five backgrounds as the current study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In each part, observers viewed a representative HMD symbology that served as the target for this study (Figure 1). This symbology format is representative of a target designator box that is currently in use and has been used in several other studies (1,2). The target was displayed on a 21-inch CRT monitor (EDL Displays, Dayton OH) and viewed at a distance of three meters.…”

Section: Apparatus and Stimulimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a previous experiment, we presented results from a study aimed at determining the minimum, or sufficient, luminance-contrast ratio for three symbology colors presented against five backgrounds (1). The method employed in that experiment was to slowly increase the luminance contrast of the symbology until the observer said they could identify the color of the symbology.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

<title>Luminance contrast requirements for colored symbols in helmet-mounted displays</title>

Havig

Heft

LaCreta

et al. 2002

Helmet- And Head-Mounted Displays VII

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and Previously, we presented an experiment in which we defined minimum, but not sufficient, luminance contrast ratios for color recognition and legibility for helmet-mounted display (HMD) use. In that experiment, observers made a subjective judgment of their ability to recognize a color by stopping the incremental increase in contrast ratio of a static display. For some target color/background combinations, there were extremely high error rates and in these cases sufficient contrast ratios were not achieved. In the present experiment, we randomly presented one of three target colors on one of five backgrounds. The contrast ratio of the target on the background ranged from 1.025:1 up to 1.3:1 in steps of 0.025 . As before, we found that observers could accurately identify the target colors at very low contrast ratios. In addition, we defined the range in which color recognition and legibility became sufficient ( 3 95% correct). In a second experiment we investigated how well observers did when more than one color appeared in the symbology at one time. This allowed observers to compare target colors against each other on the five backgrounds. We discuss our results in terms of luminance contrast ratio requirements for both color recognition as well as legibility in HMDs.14. SUBJECT TERMS luminance contrast ratio, helmet-mounted display, color recognition, legibility THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK LUMINANCE CONTRAST REQUIREMENTS FOR COLORED SYMBOLS IN HELMET-MOUNTED DISPLAYS INTRODUCTIONThe use of colored symbology in a helmet-mounted display (HMD) has the potential to give the warfighter a significant combat advantage compared to monochrome symbology (2). Unfortunately, it is not as technically easy to employ colored symbology as monochrome symbology in an HMD. Monochrome symbology can be displayed using only one phosphor and relatively high levels of luminance output can be achieved. The use of colored symbology is more complex, and may require tradeoffs in resolution and luminance (3). Since the potential use of colored HMD symbology is still in the developmental stages, it is important to establish the minimum and optimal parameters for its employment. Specific parameters that need to be addressed include luminance, contrast, and hue.In a previous experiment, we presented results from a study aimed at determining the minimum, or sufficient, luminance-contrast ratio for three symbology colors presented against five backgrou...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Apparatus and Stimulimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

<title>Luminance contrast requirements for colored symbols in helmet-mounted displays</title>

Havig

Heft

LaCreta

et al. 2002

Helmet- And Head-Mounted Displays VII

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An HMD presents symbolic or pictorial information to the eyes of a user by way of one or two miniature visual displays, such as an aiming reticle or full-color imagery (Havig, Grigsby, Heft, LaCreta, & Post, 2001), mounted on the head via a helmet or other kind of arrangement. If implemented properly, HMDs can offer advantages over traditional displays, such as increased situational awareness and ease of mobility (Velger, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptual Issues in the Use of Head-Mounted Visual Displays

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED (From -To) SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)AFRL; AFRL/HEA SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S) Air Force Research Laboratory Human Effectiveness Directorate Warfighter Readiness Research Division 6030 South Kent Street Mesa AZ 85212-6061 AFRL-HE-AZ-TP-2007-03 DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENTApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTESThis paper was originally published in the journal Human Factors (Volume 48, Fall 2006). ABSTRACTObjective: We provide a review and analysis of much of the published literature on visual perception issues that impact the design and use of head-mounted displays (HMDs). Background: Unlike the previous literature on HMDs, this review draws heavily from the basic vision literature in order to help provide insight for future design solutions for HMDs. Method: Included in this review are articles and books found cited in other works as well as articles and books obtained from an Internet search. Results: Issues discussed include the effect of brightness and contrast on depth of field, dark focus, dark vergence, and perceptual constancy; the effect of accommodation/vergence synergy on perceptual constancy, eyestrain, and discomfort; the relationship of field of view to the functioning of different visual pathways and the types of visualmotor tasks mediated by them; the relationship of binocular input to visual suppression; and the importance of head movements, head tracking, and display update lag. Conclusion: This paper offers a set of recommendations for the design and use of HMDs. Application: Consideration of the basic vision literature will provide insight for future design solutions for HMDs.

show abstract

“…Although luminance and contrast requirements for the legibility of white symbology have been and are a continuing topic of investigation, such requirements for color symbology in HMDs have not been pursued as vigorously. [15][16][17] Metrics defining color contrast (and hence luminance) are more complicated than those presented previously where the contrast refers only to differences in luminance. Color contrast metrics must include differences in chromaticity as well as luminance.…”

Section: Limitations Of Using Static Imagerymentioning

confidence: 99%

Daylight luminance requirements for full-color, see-through, helmet-mounted display systems

Harding

Rash

2017

Opt. Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. When color is implemented in helmet-mounted displays (HMDs) that are eyes-out, see-through displays, visual perception issues become an increased concern. A major confound with HMDs is their inherent see-through (transparent) property. The result is color in the displayed image that combines with color from the outside (or in-cockpit) world, producing an image with additive color. As luminance of the HMD imagery is reduced, the color separation between the HMD imagery and the background is also reduced. It is because of this additive effect that luminance contrast is so vitally important in developing HMD standards for color symbology. As a result, this paper identifies luminance requirements for full-color HMDs based upon two lines of investigation. The first is based on a study of white symbology against natural static backgrounds, where the quality of symbology was judged to be a function of not only the background luminance but also of the background complexity as well. The second is based on an evaluation of the complexity inherent in natural backgrounds and from this investigation, a predictive curve was found that describes the complexity of natural backgrounds as a function of ambient luminance. © The Authors. Published by SPIE under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Distribution or reproduction of this work in whole or in part requires full attribution of the original publication, including its DOI.[DOI: 10.1117/1.OE.56.5.051404] Keywords: luminance; helmet-mounted display; head-up display; color vision; human factors; scene complexity; symbology; natural backgrounds.Paper 161505SSP received Sep. 26, 2016; accepted for publication Jan. 11, 2017; published online Jan. 31, 2017. IntroductionFor symbology to be viewed in a see-through helmetmounted display (HMD) or head-up display (HUD), the luminance of the symbology must be sufficient to distinguish it from the see-through background. This is true whether or not symbology is displayed on a monochromatic or full-color display. When the contrast of the transparent symbology is sufficiently high, the symbology appears as an overlay on the ambient scene. In order for an HMD or HUD to be usable in an operational environment, the luminance requirements must take into consideration the type of displayed imagery (e.g., symbology, situational maps, target sights), the tasks (e.g., targeting, navigation, obstacle avoidance), the operational setting (e.g., day/night, terrain features), additional hardware (e.g., visors, windscreens, laser protection), and other considerations. For a color HMD, symbology color overlaid on an ambient scene should consider luminance and color contrast, which requires information about the spectral content of the landscape or ambient scene. However, optical designers must consider all terrain features when designing a see-through optic as the military can be deployed to any geographical location around the globe; this fact may simplify the development of luminance requirements for see-through, fullcolor HMD...

show abstract

<title>Luminance contrast and color recognition in helmet-mounted displays</title>

Cited by 12 publications

References 0 publications

<title>Luminance contrast requirements for colored symbols in helmet-mounted displays</title>

<title>Luminance contrast requirements for colored symbols in helmet-mounted displays</title>

Perceptual Issues in the Use of Head-Mounted Visual Displays

Daylight luminance requirements for full-color, see-through, helmet-mounted display systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About