Two adaptive psychophysical procedures (tracking and "yes-no" staircase) for obtaining human visual contrast sensitivity functions (CSF) were evaluated. The procedures were chosen based on their proven validity and the desire to evaluate the practical effects of stimulus transients, since tracking procedures traditionally employ gradual stimulus onsets whereas staircase procedures traditionally employ rapid stimulus onsets. The criteria for deciding which procedure was preferable for the rapid testing of large groups of untrained observers were consistency in the form of the measured CSFs across days, the subjective ease of the procedure as judged by the observer, and the time required to obtain consistent results. Both procedures gave repeatable results across days; thus, the first CSF obtained from each subject could be taken as representative of the true CSF as determined by additional testing. However, the tracking procedure was judged easier to use by the researchers and required less time to perform. No interaction was found between any of these variables and the different stimulus onset parameters of the two procedures. (Author/TW)