|
Richard L Gregory, Priscilla Heard
From: Perception, 1979, volume 8, pages
365-380 with the kind permission
of the Editor
Brain and Perception Laboratory, University
of Bristol, Department of Anatomy. The Medical School. University
Walk, Bristol BS8 1TD. England
Abstract
The Cafe Wall illusion (seen on the tiles of a local café)
is a Münsterberg chequerboard figure, but with horizontal
parallel lines which may have any luminance separating the rows
of displaced squares. These (these 'mortar’ lines) display marked
wedge distortion which is especially affected by: contrast of
the squares ('tiles'; width of the 'mortar’ lines, and their luminance
which must not be significantly higher than that of the light
squares or lower than that of the dark squares for distortion
to occur. An experiment is described from which quantitative data
have been obtained by varying these parameters. It is suggested
that contiguous regions of different luminance (and contiguous
colour regions) are normally held in spatial register by locking
from common luminance boundaries. The Café Wall illusion
is attributed to this border locking producing inappropriate contour
shifts from neighbouring regions of contrasting luminance when
separated by narrow gaps of neutral luminance. Further implications
on the border-locking notion are discussed.
1 Introduction
1 .1 Background

Figure 1. The original of the Café
Wall, St Michael’s Hill, Bristol.
It was noted some time ago (Gregory 1973) by a then member of
our laboratory, Steve Simpson, that the mortar lines of the chessboard-like
design of tiles of a café wall in St Michael's Hill, near
our laboratory in Bristol, appear not parallel as they are, but
to converge markedly in alternate-direction wedges (figure 1).
We made models of similar patterns in which several parameters
could be controlled, especially luminance contrast of the ‘tiles’,
colour of the ‘tiles’, and their rectilinear proportions; and
the width, the colour and the luminance of the parallel ‘mortar’
lines. Hundreds of subjects were shown these models, mainly in
the informal setting of lecture demonstrations, while we got a
feel for the phenomena which were striking and remarkably consistent.
It was at once noted that most of the effects persisted, or changed
in repeatable, consistent ways, over a very wide range of viewing
conditions. So there were clearly ‘hard’ data to be extracted.
The basic figure of a chessboard with alternate rows of squares
shifted by half a cycle is the Münsterberg figure (figure
2).

Figure 2. The Münsterberg figure.
By our term ‘Café Wall’ illusion we refer to the much
more general case, especially where the ‘mortar’ lines may have
a luminance different from either the light or dark ‘tiles’. It
tunis out that the parallel black lines of the Münsterberg
figure, in which the dark squares (‘tiles’) are also black, is
a special and limiting case; it does not reveal several features
of interest in this unusual distortion illusion, in which all
lines are parallel or at right angles, and the figure is essentially
symmetrical though the evoked distortion is markedly asymmetrical.
From these informal though rather extensive observations by many
observers several ‘laws’ emerged.
1.2 ‘Laws’ of the Café Wall illusion
(i) The alternate wedge distortions occur in the same directions,
at all times, for all observers under the same viewing conditions;
and for all observers the wedge distortions reverse when alternate
rows of tiles are pushed across half a cycle.
(ii) The distortion remains in the same direction for a wide
range of shift of the alternate rows: there is no sudden switch
of wedge direction when alternate rows are shifted across the
bisection, as might have been expected.
(iii) Neither the amount of the distortion nor the direction
of the distortion wedges depend on how the sides of the display
are masked. So it is not due to any kind of end effect of the
sequence of dark and light tiles at the sides. The wedge distortions
are therefore given by the repeated small scale asymmetrical features
of the figure. (iv) The distortion is much the same for any orientation
of the figure. Moulden and Renshaw (1979) find, however, small
changes with the Münsterberg figure.
(v) The rectangles can have a wide range of vertical-to-horizontal
length ratios. [For experiments described in this paper we have
used approximate squares.]
(vi) The distortion is highly dependent on the luminance contrast
of the tiles: it increases with increased luminance contrast.
(vii) The distortion occurs only when the luminance of the mortar
lies between the luminances of the dark and light tiles, or at
least, the mortar is not much darker than the dark or lighter
than the light tiles (figure 3). The standard Münsterberg
figure is a limiting and nonoptimal case where the luminances
of the mortar and dark tiles are the same. The importance of what
we call mortar luminance was realised by Fraser (1908).
(viii) The illusion is retained with coloured tiles (say red
and green) and coloured mortar; but not when the contrasting coloured
tiles have the same luminance. This dependence on luminance contrast,
and loss of distortion at isoluminance was appreciated by Fraser
(1908); and confirmed by Yvonne Lammerich in our laboratory, as
retailed by Gregory (1977) where it is also reported that the
classical converging-lines illusions show no distortion when their
lines and background are isoluminant.

Figure 3. The Café Wall display, showing
the basic effect of change of luminance of the mortar lines. The
illusion is only present when the mortar luminance lies between,
or at least is not far outside, the luminances of the dark and
light tiles. The mortar width was controlled with spacers. (This
model is made with squares of grey paper of two albedos, and not
the white paper and retroreflecting material used in the experiment.)
(ix) The wedge distortion never reverses for any changes of luminosities.
(The wedges do, however, reverse with half-cycle shifts of alternate
rows of the tiles as stated in the first ‘law’, above.)
(x) The distortion is clearly greater in somewhat peripheral
vision (cf Moulden and Renshaw 1979), or for foveal vision when
the display is blurred by a weakly de-accommodating lens.
There is an indication that each tile is distorted into a separate
small wedge: a problem is why these are seen as a continuous long
wedge for each row, in alternate directions, though the figure
has only repeated small asymmetry of the displaced tiles. (This
is enantiomorphic symmetry, cf Shuhnikov and Koptsik 1974.) Similar
large scale distortions from repeated small-scale asymmetries
are found in many other illusions, such as the Fraser figure (Fraser
1908).
(xi) The wedge distortion occurs over a very wide range of visual
angles for the display as a whole.
(xii) The distortion occurs over perhaps the entire working luminance
range of the eye.
(xiii) Tile distortion occurs only for narrow mortar lines; they
must not subtend more than about 10 min of arc (at high tile contrast,
less at low contrast) or the illusion is lost.

Figure 4. The apparent spiral is in fact
concentric circles. This is usually regarded as evidence of visual
spatial integration, in this case from misleading line elements.
1.3 Further observations
Dynamic effects occur while either the mortar-line luminance
or the luminance of the tiles is varied. The bounding borders
of the tiles are seen to move. They creep across the mortar during
luminance changes. Though a difficult observation, it seems that
the movement is greatest for the borders having the lower boundary
contrast with the mortar, as the mortar luminance is varied between
the tile luminances. This slight asymmetry of the shifts of the
borders is more easily seen when the tiles are displaced a quarter
of a cycle, to give a chessboard pattern. It is clear by using
colour contrast for the mortar, that this is not merely loss of
the mortar when it becomes isoluminant with the dark or light
tiles.
It seems to us very important to distinguish between the dynamic
shifts with luminance changes and the static displacements observed
at constant luminance. They could well be effects or symptoms
of different physiological processes, as, for example, static
wedge distortion does not increase with mortar luminances not
much darker than the dark or much lighter than the light tiles;
but this is not so for the dynamic shifts, which are dramatic
with extreme changes of mortar contrast. We shall attempt a functional
explanation - in terms of processes that seem necessary for maintaining
registration of borders. it is hoped that underlying physiological
mechanisms may soon be identified, explaining how the functions
are mediated.
1.4 Suggested explanation - the border-locking theory
For visual displays such as printing or television, it is technically
exceedingly difficult to obtain precise spatial registration at
borders, and where contrasting luminances or colours should meet
without gaps or overlaps due to misregistration. These border
discrepancies are annoying and confusing. Registration may be
achieved by high stability of the mechanical or electronic components.
but neural components are relatively labile. This problem is exacerbated
by the recent finding (Zeki 1976) that visual characteristics
such as luminance, colour, and movement are ‘mapped’ in separate
cortical regions. By analogy with the display registration problem
it is remarkable that vision is normally free of spurious lines,
gaps. or coloured edges at borders where regions of different
luminance or colour meet.
Visual registration does, however, seem to be lost in some conditions:
(a) with extremely high luminance contrasts, especially at low
luminance levels, and (b) for contrasting colours presented with
no or very small luminance differences (isoluminance) (Gregory
1977). The former produces discrepancies during image - retina
movement, which is hardly surprising, as under conditions of extreme
luminosity contrast retinal receptors have very different response
times, which must. during image - retinal movement, produce spatial
discrepancies of retinally signalled positions. Under the conditions
of isoluminant colour contrast. borders appear markedly ‘jazzy’
(an effect used, if unwittingly, in Op Art) and at isoluminance
there is instability and there are relative shifts with movement.
So we find similar phenomena for both extreme and zero luminance
contrast. Why should this he so? The explanation might be sought
in physiological mechanisms; but we shall suggest an explanation
in functional terms, without for the moment attempting to specify
a mechanism or which neural mechanism may in these conditions
be upset or disturbed. It is suggested that spatial registration
is normally maintained by an active system accepting border-luminance
differences for locking these various features together - so that
registration is normally maintained at borders. It seems to us
that luminance differences provide master signals for locking,
and so registering, contiguous regions of contrasting luminances
and colours. We should expect a locking signal system of this
kind to break down when: (a) differences in retinal delay are
too great for locking to be maintained with image - retina movement;
and (b) at isoluminance, when there will be no locking signals
to maintain registration. We may also expect systematic distortions
to be produced by locking across narrow gaps or lines of neutral
luminance. It is to this we attribute the Café Wall illusion.
Regions of different luminance separated by a neutral gap, not
wider than the range of the locking signals, should be pulled
together by the locking normally serving to maintain registration
in spite of the lability of neural components, and the different
response times associated with different luminances (as demonstrated
with the Pulfrich Pendulum; and, for the colour systems, by Benham’s
disk).
It is suggested that the ‘laws’ of the Café Wall illusion
describe functional properties of the proposed border-locking
system. If this is so, the observed distortions and dynamic shifts
can be used to demonstrate and measure functional characteristics
of the border-locking system; and to discover the limits over
which it works appropriately before it allows, or generates, errors
appearing as illusory phenomena.
In this study we consider effects of width and luminance of the
separating mortar lines; and of contrast and mean luminances of
the dark and light tiles. For these measurements, art apparatus
was designed and built to vary the luminances and the width of
the separating mortar lines over wide ranges, in order to discover
the limiting conditions for the distortion to occur and to measure
the amount of the distortion under various conditions. The distortions
were measured with a simple matching technique.
continues
|