The watercolor illusion is a color spreading effect at long-range diffusing from a thin colored contour juxtaposed to a chromatic one of higher contrast and a object-hole effect across a large area (Pinna, 1987; Pinna et al., 2001, 2003; Pinna & Reeves, 2006). The watercolored figure appears evenly colored by an opaque light veil of chromatic tint (coloration effect), with a clear surface color property spreading from the lighter contour. At the same time, the watercolored figure manifests a strong figure-ground organization and a solid figural appearance comparable to a bas-relief illuminated from the top (object-hole effect). It appears similar to a rounded surface segregated in depth, which extends out from the flat surface. The complementary region appears as a hole or empty space. The phenomenal properties of coloration and object-hole effects raise some questions. Can the two effects be considered relatively independent? Under what conditions can a possible dissociation occur? How does the dissociation of one effect, say the coloration, influence the object-hole effect and vice versa? To answer these questions two new effects related to the watercolor illusion were psychophysically studied: (1) the “uneven watercolor,” based on a modified watercolor figure without volumetric and three-dimensional properties but with a strong coloration effect and (2) the “watercolor surface capture,” where oblique lines within a watercolor figure appear bulging, curved in depth and segregated from those that are perceived as placed in the background or perceived through holes. The results of two experiments suggest that the coloration effect can be dissociated from the object-hole one. These results are discussed in the light of a simple summation hypothesis of the underlying effects composing the whole figurality. This hypothesis can suggest further investigation both in the phenomenal and in the neurophysiological domain.

The discontinuities of phase-shifted abutting line gratings give rise to perception of an “illusory contour” (IC) along the line terminations. Neuronal responses to such ICs have been interpreted as evidence for a specialized visual mechanism, since such responses cannot be predicted from conventional linear receptive fields. However, when the spatial scale of the component gratings (carriers) is large compared to the neuron's luminance passband, these IC responses might be evoked simply by the luminance edges at the line terminations. Thus by presenting abutting gratings at a series of carrier spatial scales to cat A18 neurons, we were able to distinguish genuine nonlinear responses from those due to luminance edges. Around half of the neurons (both simple and complex types) showed a bimodal response pattern to abutting gratings: one peak at a low carrier spatial frequency range that overlapped with the luminance passband, and a second distinct peak at much higher frequencies beyond the neuron's grating resolution. For those bimodally responding neurons, the low-frequency responses were sensitive to carrier phase, but the high-frequency responses were phase-invariant. Thus the responses at low carrier spatial frequencies could be understood via a linear model, while the higher frequency responses represented genuine nonlinear IC processing. IC responsive neurons also demonstrated somewhat lower spatial preference to the periodic contours (envelopes) compared to gratings, but the optimal orientation and motion direction for both were quite similar. The nonlinear responses to ICs could be explained by the same energy mechanism underlying responses to second-order stimuli such as contrast-modulated gratings. Similar neuronal preferences for ICs and for gratings may contribute to the form-cue invariant perception of moving contours.