Mean-modulated flicker -- wherein luminance increments and decrements of equal magnitude are applied, over time, to a test field -- is commonly used in both clinical assessment of vision and experimental studies of visual systems. However, presenting mean-modulated flicker on computer-controlled displays is problematic; displays typically introduce luminance artifacts to flickering stimuli, especially at high flicker frequency or contrast, potentially interfering with the validity of findings. Here, we present a battery of tests that we used to judge the suitability of displays for presenting  mean-modulated flicker. These tests revealed marked differences between a new high-performance liquid-crystal display (LCD; EIZO ColorEdge CG247X) and a new consumer-grade LCD (Dell U2415b), despite the displays' vendor-supplied specifications being almost identical. We measured displayed luminance using a spot meter , and a linearized photodiode device to record displayed luminance waveforms . We derived  spatial uniformity,  response times, Fourier amplitude spectra,  cycle-averaged luminance , and root-mean-squared luminance . We presented paired luminance pulses to quantify the displays' nonlinear dynamics. The CG247X showed relatively good spatial uniformity . Fourier transformation of nominally static test patches revealed spectra free of artifacts, with the exception of a frame response (artifactual flicker related to the display refresh) . The CG247X's response times depended on both source and destination luminance . Despite this nonlinear behaviour, we were able to define a contrast and frequency range wherein the CG247X was artifact-free , that is, the relationship between nominal luminance and displayed luminance was accurately modelled using a causal, linear time-invariant system. This range included contrasts up to 80\%, and flicker frequencies up to 30 Hz.
Achromatic, mean-modulated flicker ( wherein luminance increments and decrements of equal magnitude are applied, over time, to a test field ) is commonly used in both clinical assessment of vision and experimental studies of visual systems. However, presenting flicker on computer-controlled displays is problematic; displays typically introduce luminance artifacts at high flicker frequency or contrast, potentially interfering with the validity of findings. Here, we present a battery of tests used to weigh the relative merits of two displays for presenting achromatic, mean-modulated flicker. These tests revealed marked differences between a new high-performance liquid-crystal display (LCD; EIZO ColorEdge CG247X) and a new consumer-grade LCD (Dell U2415b), despite displays' vendor-supplied specifications being almost identical. We measured displayed luminance using a spot meter and a linearized photodiode . We derived several measures, including spatial uniformity, the effect of viewing angle, response times, Fourier amplitude spectra, and cycle-averaged luminance . We presented paired luminance pulses to quantify the displays' nonlinear dynamics. The CG247X showed relatively good spatial uniformity (e.g., at moderate luminance, standard deviation 2.8\% versus U2415b's 5.3\%). Fourier transformation of nominally static test patches revealed spectra free of artifacts, with the exception of a frame response . The CG247X's rise and fall times depended on both the luminance from which, and to which, it responded, as is to be generally expected from LCDs . Despite this nonlinear behaviour, we were able to define a contrast and frequency range wherein the CG247X appeared largely artifact-free ; the relationship between nominal luminance and displayed luminance was accurately modelled using a causal, linear time-invariant system. This range included contrasts up to 80\%, and flicker frequencies up to 30 Hz.
R
Mean-modulated flicker --
Achromatic, mean-modulated flicker (
R
--
)
D
mean-modulated
D
to flickering stimuli, especially
R
that we used to judge the suitability of
used to weigh the relative merits of two
A
achromatic,
D
the
D
,
D
device to record displayed luminance waveforms
A
several measures, including
A
the effect of viewing angle,
A
and
D
, and root-mean-squared luminance
R
.
(e.g., at moderate luminance, standard deviation 2.8\% versus U2415b's 5.3\%).
D
(artifactual flicker related to the display refresh)
R
response
rise and fall
R
source and destination luminance
the luminance from which, and to which, it responded, as is to be generally expected from LCDs
R
was
appeared largely
R
, that is,
;