
Proceedings Paper
What eye model should we use for MRT testing?Format | Member Price | Non-Member Price |
---|---|---|
$17.00 | $21.00 |
Paper Abstract
In its current forni, the NVL model does not adequately predict the
laboratory measured minimum resolvable temperature (MRT) values at low
or high spatial frequencies. The differences between the measured and
the predicted values are caused by inappropriate modeling of the eye,
tremendous variability in observers, and ill-defined data analysis
methodology. In the usual laboratory procedure, the observer is allowed
to move his head. This, in effect, renioves the eye's response from the
model because by adjusting his viewing distance, the observer appears to
achieve equal detection capability at all spatial frequencies. Recent
studies provide two new eye models: one allowing head movement and one
in which the head is stationary.
A NVL type model was modified to accept five different eye models:
the original NVL eye model, the Sendall-Rosell model, the two new eye
models, and the Campbell-Robson eye model. All the models provided the
same shaped MRT curve at high spatial frequencies to within a constant.
Large discrepancies exist at low spatial frequencies presumably due to
the inability to model the eye's inhibitory response.
Paper Details
Date Published: 1 October 1990
PDF: 9 pages
Proc. SPIE 1309, Infrared Imaging Systems: Design, Analysis, Modeling, and Testing, (1 October 1990); doi: 10.1117/12.21759
Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 1309:
Infrared Imaging Systems: Design, Analysis, Modeling, and Testing
PDF: 9 pages
Proc. SPIE 1309, Infrared Imaging Systems: Design, Analysis, Modeling, and Testing, (1 October 1990); doi: 10.1117/12.21759
Show Author Affiliations
Gerald C. Holst, Martin Marietta Electronic Sys (United States)
Alan R. Taylor, Martin Marietta Electronic Sys (United States)
Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 1309:
Infrared Imaging Systems: Design, Analysis, Modeling, and Testing
© SPIE. Terms of Use
