Legibility Index for Examining Common Viewing Situations: A New Definition Using Solid Angle

References

• A preliminary version of this paper was delivered at the IESNA annual conference 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Bailey I, Clear R, Berman S. 1993. Size as a determinant of reading speed. J Illum Eng Soc. 22 (2): 102–117.
   Google Scholar
• Blackwell HR. 1946. Contrast thresholds of the human eye. J Opt Soc Am. 36 (11): 624–643.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blackwell HR. 1959. Development and use of a quantitative method for specification of interior illumination levels on the basis of performance data. Illum Eng. 54 (6): 317–353.
   Google Scholar
• Blackwell HR. 1970. Development of procedures and instruments for visual task evaluation. Illum Eng. 65 (4): 267–291.
   Google Scholar
• Blackwell HR. 1980. Description of a comprehensive family of relative contrast sensitivity (RCS) functions of luminance to reflect differences in size of task detail, task eccentricity and observer age. Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio: Illuminating Engineering Research Institute; Available in Compendium of technical data in support of CIE publication No. 19/2. Illuminating Engineering Research Institute, New York, N.Y.
   Google Scholar
• Blackwell HR, Blackwell OM. 1980. Population data for 140 normal 20–30 year olds for use in assessing some effects of lighting upon visual performance. J Illum Eng Soc. 9 (3): 158–174.
   Google Scholar
• Blackwell OM, Blackwell HR. 1971. Visual performance data for 156 normal observers of various ages. J Illum Eng Soc. 1 (1): 3–13.
   Google Scholar
• Boff KR, Kaufman L, Thomas JP editors. 1986. Handbook of perception and human performance: vol. 1. Sensory processes and perception. New York, NY: Wiley. 1296 p.
   Google Scholar
• Bouma H, Legein CP, Melotte HEM, Zabel L. 1982. Is large print easy to read? Oral reading rate and word recognition of elderly subjects. IPO Annual Progress Report. 17: 84–90.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell FW, Robson JG. 1968. Application of fourier analysis to the visibility of gratings. J Physiol. 197: 551–566.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clear R, Berman S. 1990. Speed, Accuracy and VL. J Illum Eng Soc. 19 (2): 124–131.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dember WN. 1965. The psychology of perception. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winson. 402 p.
   Google Scholar
• Gove PB, Merriam-Webster editorial staff. 1986. Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.
   Google Scholar
• Hendee WR, Wells PNT editors. 1993. The perception of visual information. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag. 409 p.
   Google Scholar
• Holick AJ, Carlson PJ. 2002. Model of overhead-sign luminance needed for legibility. Transp Res Rec. 1801: 80–86.
   Google Scholar
• Howell W, Kraft C. 1960. Size, blur and contrast as variables affecting the legibility of alphanumeric symbols on radar-type displays. OH: Wright-Patterson AFB. WADC Technical Report 59–536.
   Google Scholar
• Kambich DG. 1991. An alternative relative visual performance model. J Illum. Eng. Soc. 20 (1): 19–27.
   Google Scholar
• Kristofferson AB. 1957. Visual detection as influenced by target form in discrimination a related to military problems. Washington DC: National Academy of Sciences. National research council publication 561:p109–127.
   Google Scholar
• Legge GE, Pelli DG, Rubin GS, Schleske MM. 1985. Psychophysics of reading: I normal vision. Vision Res. 25 (2): 239–252.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moon P, Spencer D. 1944. Visual data applied to lighting design. J Opt Soc Am. 34 (10): 605–617.
   Google Scholar
• Rea MS. 1986. Toward a model of visual performance: foundations and data. J Illum. Eng. Soc. 15 (2): 41–57.
   Google Scholar
• Rea MS editor. 2000. The IESNA lighting handbook: reference and application. 9th ed. New York, NY: The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America. Lighting calculation; p 9-1–9-72.
   Google Scholar
• Rea MS, Quellette MJ. 1988. Visual performance using reaction times. Light Res Tech. 20 (4): 139–153.
   Google Scholar
• Rea MS, Quellette MJ. 1991. Relative visual performance: a basis for application. Light Res Tech. 23 (3): 135–144.
   Google Scholar
• Rubin GS, Siegel KA. 1984. Recognition of low-pass filtered letters and faces. Paper presented at annual meeting of Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Sarasota, FL.
   Google Scholar
• Shlaer S. 1937. The relation between visual acuity and illumination. J Gen Physiol. 21: 165–188.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shlaer S, Smith E, Chase A. 1942. Visual acuity and illumination in different spectral regions. J Gen Physiol. 25 (4): 553–569.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• United States Sign Council. 1998. Sign legibility, overview and calculation methodology, sign legibility index. Member Resource Folio/Legislative Information. Bristol, PA: United States Sign Council. 2 p.
   Google Scholar
• Wandell BA. 1995. Foundation of vision. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates. 476 p.
   Google Scholar
• Wolken JJ. 1966. Vision, biophysics and biochemistry of the retinal photoreceptors. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas. 193 p.
   Google Scholar
• Zwahlen HT, Schnell T. 1995. A combined age-background luminance contrast multiplication function to adjust the human contrast threshold more accurately in visibility and legibility. Proceedings of Progress in Automobile Lighting, 240–247. Athens, OH: Ohio University.
   Google Scholar
• Zwahlen HT, Schnell T. 1999. Legibility of traffic sign text and symbols. Trans Res Rec. 1692: 142–151.
   Google Scholar