Jaume Pujol Ramo

Camera-based colour measurement

Abstract: For several decades, imaging sensors (CCD and CMOS) have been extensively used in many types of imaging capture devices (cameras and scanners). This first stage in any digital imaging workflow is very important in order to control the exact colour reproduction of images in subsequent applications (astronomy, television, cinema, printing, machine vision, mobiles, 3 etc). However, there are many parameters (spectral sensitivities, white balance, dynamic range, etc) which can negatively influence accurate control of the colour reproduction of digital imaging devices. Nevertheless, if all these parameters are controlled, it is possible to transform a conventional digital imaging capture device into a versatile tele-colorimeter or even tele-spectrocolorimeter. In this chapter, the fundamentals and challenges of camera-based colour measurement will be explained, including several aspects of specialinterest, such as the control of raw RGB colour space, and the similarities and differences between spectral and colorimetric characterization and calibration. Finally, future trends with clear industrial applications will be described, including case studies focused on the spatial-chromatic dithering of texture images (textiles, ceramic tiles, natural stones, etc), and the pseudo-visualization of non-visible images from multi-spectral imaging capture.

Effect of Experimental Conditions in the Accommodation Response in Myopia

SIGNIFICANCE The accommodative response is more affected by the type of refractive error than the method of stimulation, field of view (FOV), or stimulus depth. PURPOSE This study aims to analyze the effect of stimulation method, stimulus depth, and FOV on the accommodation response (AR) for emmetropes (EMM), late-onset myopes (LOM), and early-onset myopes (EOM). METHODS Monocular AR was measured in 26 young observers (n = 9 EMM, n = 8 LOM, n = 9 EOM) under 60 different viewing conditions that were the result of permuting the following factors: (1) stimulation method (free space or Badal lens viewing), (2) stimulus depth (flat or volumetric), (3) FOV (2.5, 4, 8, 10, and 30°), and (4) accommodative stimulus (AS: 0.17, 2.50, and 5.00 diopters [D]). RESULTS Mixed analysis of variance for 2.50 D of AS resulted in a significant effect of refractive group (F = 6.77, P < .01) and FOV (F = 1.26, P = .04). There was also a significant interaction between stimulus depth and FOV (F = 2.73, P = .03) and among stimulation method, FOV, and refractive group (F = 2.42, P = .02). For AS of 5.00 D, there was a significant effect of refractive group (F = 13.88, P < .01) and stimulation method (F = 5.16, P = .03). There was also a significant interaction of stimulation method, stimulus depth, and refractive group (F = 4.08, P = .03). When controlling for all interactions, LOM showed larger lags than EMM and EOM; the AR did not significantly change for fields of 8, 10, and 30°, and it did not significantly differ for different stimulation methods or stimulus depth. CONCLUSIONS Previously reported differences in AR when using lens-based methods compared with free space viewing may be explained by the effect of other factors such as the FOV or the depth of the stimulus. Targets with an FOV of 8 or 10° may be optimal for accurate ARs.SIGNIFICANCE The accommodative response is more affected by the type of refractive error than the method of stimulation, field of view (FOV), or stimulus depth. PURPOSE This study aims to analyze the effect of stimulation method, stimulus depth, and FOV on the accommodation response (AR) for emmetropes (EMM), late-onset myopes (LOM), and early-onset myopes (EOM). METHODS Monocular AR was measured in 26 young observers (n = 9 EMM, n = 8 LOM, n = 9 EOM) under 60 different viewing conditions that were the result of permuting the following factors: (1) stimulation method (free space or Badal lens viewing), (2) stimulus depth (flat or volumetric), (3) FOV (2.5, 4, 8, 10, and 30°), and (4) accommodative stimulus (AS: 0.17, 2.50, and 5.00 diopters [D]). RESULTS Mixed analysis of variance for 2.50 D of AS resulted in a significant effect of refractive group (F = 6.77, P < .01) and FOV (F = 1.26, P = .04). There was also a significant interaction between stimulus depth and FOV (F = 2.73, P = .03) and among stimulation method, FOV, and refractive group (F = 2.42, P = .02). For AS of 5.00 D, there was a significant effect of refractive group (F = 13.88, P < .01) and stimulation method (F = 5.16, P = .03). There was also a significant interaction of stimulation method, stimulus depth, and refractive group (F = 4.08, P = .03). When controlling for all interactions, LOM showed larger lags than EMM and EOM; the AR did not significantly change for fields of 8, 10, and 30°, and it did not significantly differ for different stimulation methods or stimulus depth. CONCLUSIONS Previously reported differences in AR when using lens-based methods compared with free space viewing may be explained by the effect of other factors such as the FOV or the depth of the stimulus. Targets with an FOV of 8 or 10° may be optimal for accurate ARs.

Suitability of open-field autorefractors as pupillometers and instrument design effects

AIM To determine the agreement and repeatability of the pupil measurement obtained with VIP-200 (Neuroptics), PowerRef II (Plusoptix), WAM-5500 (Grand Seiko) and study the effects of instrument design on pupillometry. METHODS Forty patients were measured twice in low, mid and high mesopic. Repeatability was analyzed with the within-subject standard deviation (Sw) and paired t-tests. Agreement was studied with Bland-Altman plots and repeated measures ANOVA. Instrument design analysis consisted on measuring pupil size with PowerRef II simulating monocular and binocular conditions as well as with proximity cues and without proximity cues. RESULTS The mean difference (±standard deviation) between test-retest for low, mid and high mesopic conditions were, respectively: -0.09 (±0.16), -0.05 (±0.18) and -0.08 (±0.23) mm for Neuroptics, -0.05 (±0.17), -0.12 (±0.23) and -0.17 (±0.34) mm for WAM-5500, -0.04 (±0.27), -0.13 (±0.37) and -0.11 (±0.28) mm for PowerRef II. Regarding agreement with Neuroptics, the mean difference for low, mid and high mesopic conditions were, respectively: -0.48 (±0.35), -0.83 (±0.52) and -0.38 (±0.56) mm for WAM-5500, -0.28 (±0.56), -0.70 (±0.55) and -0.61 (±0.54) mm for PowerRef II. The mean difference of binocular minus monocular pupil measurements was: -0.83 (±0.87) mm; and with proximity cues minus without proximity cues was: -0.30 (±0.77) mm. CONCLUSION All the instruments show similar repeat-ability. In all illumination conditions, agreement of Neuroptics with WAM-5500 and PowerRef II is not good enough, which can be partially induced due to their open field design.

Effect of apparent depth cues on accommodation in a Badal optometer

The aim was to analyse the effect of peripheral depth cues on accommodation in Badal optometers.

Response for light scattered in the ocular fundus from double-pass and Hartmann–Shack estimations

Double-pass (DP) and Hartmann-Shack (HS) are complementary techniques based on reflections of light in the ocular fundus that may be used to estimate the optical properties of the human eye. Under conventional data processing, both of these assessment modes provide information on aberrations. In addition, DP data contain the effects of scattering. In the ocular fundus, this phenomenon may arise from the interaction of light with not only the retina, but also deeper layers up to which certain wavelengths may penetrate. In this work, we estimate the response of the ocular fundus to incident light by fitting the deviations between DP and HS estimations using an exponential model. In measurements with negligible intraocular scattering, such differences may be related to the lateral spreading of light that occurs in the ocular fundus due to the diffusive properties of the media at the working wavelength. The proposed model was applied in young healthy eyes to evaluate the performance of scattering in such a population. Besides giving a parameter with information on the ocular fundus, the model contributes to the understanding of the differences between DP and HS estimations.

Comparison of the Adaptive Optics Vision Analyzer and the KR-1 W for measuring ocular wave aberrations

The aim was to assess the agreement in the measurement of ocular aberrations between a new Adaptive Optics Vision Analyzer (AOVA, Voptica, Murcia, Spain) and a commercial aberrometer (KR‐1 W, Topcon, Tokyo, Japan), both based on the Hartmann–Shack technique.

Technical improvements applied to a double-pass setup for performance and cost optimization

Abstract. We have studied the possibility of improving the performance, simplifying, and reducing the cost of a double-pass system by the use of alternative technologies. The system for correcting the spherical correction has been based on a focusable electro-optical lens, and a recording device based on CMOS technology and a superluminescent diode (SLED) light source have been evaluated separately. The suitability of the CMOS camera has been demonstrated, while the SLED could not break the speckle by itself. The final experimental setup, consisting of a CMOS camera and a laser diode, has been compared with a commercial double-pass system, proving its usefulness for ocular optical quality and scattering measurements.