The definition of contrast in a complex scene is a long-standing problem. The local contrast in an image may be approximated by the contrast of a Gabor patch of varying phase and bandwidth. Observers' perceived (apparent) contrast, as indicated by matching of such patterns, were compared here to the physical contrast calculated by a number of definitions. The 2 c/deg 1-octave Gabor patch stimuli of different phases were presented side by side, separated by 4 deg. During each session the subjects (n = 5) were adapted to the average luminance, and four different contrast levels were randomly interleaved. The subject's task was to indicate which of the two patterns was lower in contrast. Equal apparent contrast was determined by fitting a psychometric function to the data. The results of the matching rejected the hypothesis that either the Michelson formula or the King-Smith and Kulikowski contrast metric (C _KK = ( L _max −L _background ) L _background ) was used by the subjects to set the matching. The use of the Nominal contrast (the Michelson contrast of the underlying sinusoid) as an estimate of apparent contrast could not be rejected. In a second experiment the apparent contrast of a 1-octave Gabor patch was matched to the apparent contrast of a 2-octave Gabor patch (of Nominal contrast of 0.1, 0.3, 0.6, 0.8) using the method of adjustment. The results of this experiment disagree with the prediction of the Nominal contrast definition as well. The local band-limited contrast measure (Pen, 1990), when used with the modifications suggested by Lubin (1995) as an estimate of apparent contrast, could not be rejected by the results of either experiment. These results suggest that a computational contrast metric based on multi-scale bandpass filtering is a better estimate of apparent perceived contrast than any of the other metrics tested.