Visual determination of hue suprathreshold color-difference tolerances

This research extends the previous RIT-DuPont research on suprathreshold color-difference tolerances in which CIELAB was sampled in a balanced factorial design to quantify global lack of visual uniformity. The current experiments sampled hue, specifically. Three complete hue circles at two lightnesses (L* = 40 and 60) and two chroma levels ( = 20 and 40) plus three of the five CIE recommended colors (red, green, blue) were scaled, visually, for hue discrimination, resulting in 39 color centers. Forty-five observers participated in a forced-choice perceptibility experiment, where the total color difference of 393 sample pairs were compared with a near-neutral anchor-pair stimulus of 1.03 A supplemental experiment was performed by 30 additional observers in order to validate four of the 39 color centers. A total of 34,626 visual observations were made under the recently established CIE recommended reference conditions defined for the CIE94 color-difference equation. The statistical method logit analysis with three-dimensional normit function was used to determine the hue discrimination for each color center. A three-dimensional analysis was required due to precision limitations of a digital printer used to produce the majority of colored samples. There was unwanted variance in lightness and chroma in addition to the required variance in hue. This statistical technique enabled estimates of only hue discrimination. The three-dimensional analysis was validated in the supplemental experiment, where automotive coatings produced with a minimum of unwanted variance yielded the same visual tolerances when analyzed using one-dimensional probit analysis. The results indicated that the hue discrimination suprathresholds of the pooled observers varied with CIELAB hue angle position. The suprathreshold also increased with the chroma position of a given color center, consistent with previous visual results. The results were compared with current color-difference formulas: CMC, BFD, and CIE94. All three formulas had statistically equivalent performance when used to predict the visual data. Given the lack of a hue-angle dependent function embedded in CIE94, it is clear from these results that neither CMC nor BFD adequately predict the visual data. Thus, these and other hue-suprathreshold data can be used to develop a new color-difference formula with superior performance to current equations. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Col Res Appl, 23, 302–313, 1998     

Defining a practical method of ascertaining textile color acceptability

The relations between supplier and customer are today more important than they have ever been. However, conflicts do sometimes arise between them, deriving from differences in the judgment of color matchings. Colorimetry's role is precisely to avoid such conflicts through instrument measurements. A study was made on the pass/fail problems, based on 1,830 measurements and observations made in industrial textile firms, followed by 350 new tests. Human judgments are as liable to errors as instrument measurements, because the surface effects are often misleading for the observer. This study proposes a sorting method that combines the differences deriving from measurements by colorimetric instruments and by visual judgment. The Color Measurement Committee (CMC) equation, widely used in the textile field, has given excellent practical results. The CIE94 equation, which uses the same principle of ellipsoid tolerance, offers a mathematical simplification as well as further information on the sample observation conditions in order to determine color differences. Nevertheless, these two equations are different, and the CIE94 indexes must not be interpreted with the same tolerances as those of the CMC. Pending the CIE recommendations concerning textile samples, new acceptability tolerances should be redetermined for the CIE94. This article presents an innovative way of calculating metameric indexes that, when coupled with acceptability equations, allow the agreement rate between visual judgment and automatic selection to be increased.     

Visual evaluation at scale of threshold to suprathreshold color difference

Visual evaluation experiments of color discrimination threshold and suprathreshold color‐difference comparison were carried out using CRT colors based on the psychophysical methods of interleaved staircase and constant stimuli, respectively. A large set of experimental data was generated ranged from threshold to large suprathreshold color difference at the five CIE color centers. The visual data were analyzed in detail for every observer at each visual scale to show the effect of color‐difference magnitude on the observer precision. The chromaticity ellipses from this study were compared with four previous published data, of CRT colors by Cui and Luo, and of surface colors by RIT‐DuPont, Cheung and Rigg, and Guan and Luo, to report the reproducibility of this kind of experiment using CRT colors and the variations between CRT and surface data, respectively. The present threshold data were also compared against the different suprathreshold data to show the effect of color‐difference scales. The visual results were further used to test the three advance color‐difference formulae, CMC, CIE94, and CIEDE2000, together with the basic CIELAB equation. In their original forms or with optimized K_L values, the CIEDE2000 outperformed others, followed by CMC, and with the CIELAB and CIE94 the poorest for predicting the combined dataset of all color centers in the present study. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Col Res Appl, 30, 198–208, 2005; Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/col.20106     

Setting tolerances on color and texture for automotive coatings

In the automotive industry, color quality control is increasingly done by reflection measurements. We discuss how color tolerances are set in specifications to suppliers of add‐on parts and to paint suppliers. We mention several factors that often lead to unrealistically tight settings, and therefore to incorrect rejections and unnecessary high productions costs. We show that this is likely to occur when the dE_ab color difference equation is used, or when a strict criterion separating pass from fail is used instead of specifying a “grey area” where instrumental monitoring needs to be followed by visual assessments. Unrealistically, tight tolerances also result from halving tolerances in the supply‐customer chain in an attempt to compensate color variations due to uncontrolled application conditions. Tolerances should be widened further when a gap separates an add‐on part from the car body, making visual discrimination of color differences less critical. Other common situations where tolerances should be widened are the presence of visual texture in effect coatings, the lightness of metallic coatings becoming very high (L*> 100) and measurement geometries close to the gloss angle. Finally, we address the issue that instrumental color tolerances should not be tighter than what is allowed by instrumental reproducibility, repeatability, and inter‐instrument agreement. Accounting for these factors, we provide a set of reasonable values for tolerances on color and on visual texture parameters, based on our own practical experience. But realistic tolerance values depend very much on actual conditions, and should be agreed in tripartite discussions among automotive industry, suppliers of add‐on parts, and paint supplier. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Col Res Appl, 39, 88–98, 2014     

Development of a comprehensive visual dataset based on a CIE blue color center: Assessment of color difference formulae using various statistical methods

The objectives of this work were to develop a comprehensive visual dataset around one CIE blue color center, NCSU‐B1, and to use the new dataset to test the performance of the major color difference formulae in this region of color space based on various statistical methods. The dataset comprised of 66 dyed polyester fabrics with small color differences ($\Delta E_{{\rm ab}}^* < 5$ ) around a CIE blue color center. The visual difference between each sample and the color center was assessed by 26 observers in three separate sittings using a modified AATCC gray scale and a total of 5148 assessments were obtained. The performance of CIELAB, CIE94, CMC(l:c), BFD(l:c), and CIEDE2000 (K_L:K_C:K_H) color difference formulae based on the blue dataset was evaluated at various K_L (or l) values using PF/3, conventional correlation coefficient (r), Spearman rank correlation coefficient (ρ) and the STRESS function. The optimum range for K_L (or l) was found to be 1–1.3 based on PF/3, 1.4–1.7 based on r, and 1–1.4 based on STRESS, and in these ranges the performances of CIEDE2000, CMC, BFD and CIE94 were not statistically different at the 95% confidence level. At K_L (or l) = 1, the performance of CIEDE2000 was statistically improved compared to CMC, CIE94 and CIELAB. Also, for NCSU‐B1, the difference in the performance of CMC (2:1) from the performance of CMC (1:1) was statistically insignificant at 95% confidence. The same result was obtained when the performance of all the weighted color difference formulae were compared for K_L (or l) 1 versus 2. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Col Res Appl, 2011     

RIT‐DuPont supra‐threshold color‐tolerance individual color‐difference pair dataset

The RIT‐DuPont dataset has been used extensively for formula development and testing since its inception during the 1980's, for example, in the development of CIE94 and CIEDE2000. The dataset was published as 156 color‐tolerances, T₅₀, along specific vector directions about 19 color centers. Probit analysis was used to transform judgments of 958 color‐difference pairs by 50 observers to these 156 tolerances. For most statistical significance testing, the number of samples determines the confidence limits. Thus, there was an interest in publishing the individual color‐difference pair visual and colorimetric data to improve the precision of significance testing. From these 958 pairs, 828 pairs had determinable visual differences. The others had either excessive visual uncertainty or had unanimous visual judgments such that visual differences were undefined. In addition, a method was devised to assign visual uncertainty to each of these pairs using the principles of maximum likelihood and the T₅₀ values. Comparisons were made between the T₅₀ and individual color‐difference pair data both including and omitting uncertainty weightings. The weighted dataset was found to be equivalent to the T₅₀ tolerances. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Col Res Appl, 2010     

A preliminary comparison of CIE color differences to textile color acceptability using average observers

Ninety‐six nylon pairs were prepared, including red, yellow, green, and blue standards, each at two lightness levels with CIE94 ΔE units ranging from 0.15 to 4.01. Visual assessments of acceptability were carried out by 21 females. Logistic regression compared visual results to four color‐difference equations, CIELAB, CMC, CIE94, and CIEDE2000. It was found that CMC most closely represented judgments of average observers. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Col Res Appl, 30, 288–294, 2005; Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/col.20124     

Study of color perceptibility of gonio‐apparent panels with curvature angle

Color tolerances of curved gonio‐apparent panels have been studied in this work. To achieve that, an experimental set‐up of the illumination and tilt variation of two identical coated panels was designed for simulation of curved panels with both concave and convex borders and with and without effect pigments (perceived as solid and gonio‐apparent colors, respectively). Finally, visual and instrumental measures were collected with both curvatures. The results show that the relationship of the instrumental color difference with the tilt angle can be modeled by a second‐order and the vertex did not depend on illumination, but on coating type. The critical angles (the angle marked when the color discrepancy between two identical samples is merely perceived) assessed by the observers showed that they were not equal according to border, nor according to coating type. The color tolerances at these angles were clearly higher than the conventional chromatic thresholds of industrial color comparisons.     

Are chroma tolerances dependent on hue‐angle?

Relationships between suprathreshold chroma tolerances and CIELAB hue‐angles have been analyzed through the results of a new pair‐comparison experiment and the experimental combined data set employed by CIE TC 1–47 for the development of the latest CIE color‐difference formula, CIEDE2000. Chroma tolerances have been measured by 12 normal observers at 21 CRT‐generated color centers L*₁₀ = 40, C*_ab,10 = 20 and 40, and h_ab,10 at 30° regular steps). The results of this experiment lead to a chroma‐difference weighting function with hue‐angle dependence W_CH, which is in good agreement with the one proposed by the LCD color‐difference formula [Color Res Appl 2001;26:369–375]. This W_CH function is also consistent with the experimental results provided by the combined data set employed by CIE TC 1–47. For the whole CIE TC 1–47 data set, as well as for each one of its four independent subsets, the PF/3 performance factor [Color Res Appl 1999;24:331–343] was improved by adding to CIEDE2000 the W_CH function proposed by LCD, or the one derived by us using the results of our current experiment together with the combined data set employed by CIE TC 1–47. Nevertheless, unfortunately, from the current data, this PF/3 improvement is small (and statistically nonsignificant): 0.3 for the 3657 pairs provided by CIE TC 1–47 combined data set and 1.6 for a subset of 590 chromatic pairs (C*_ab,10>5.0) with color differences lower than 5.0 CIELAB units and due mainly to chroma. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Col Res Appl, 29, 420–427, 2004; Published online in Wiley Interscience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/col.20057     

Correlation between visual and colorimetric scales ranging from threshold to large color difference

Psychophysical experiments of color discrimination threshold and suprathreshold color‐difference comparison were carried out with CRT‐generated stimuli using the interleaved staircase and constant stimuli methods, respectively. The experimental results ranged from small (including threshold) to large color difference at the five CIE color centers, which were satisfactorily described by chromaticity ellipses as equal color‐difference contours in the CIELAB space. The comparisons of visual and colorimetric scales in CIELAB unit and threshold unit indicated that the colorimetric magnitudes typically were linear with the visual ones, though with different proportions in individual directions or color centers. In addition, color difference was generally underestimated by the Euclidean distance in the CIELAB space, whereas colorimetric magnitude was perceptually underestimated for threshold unit, implying the present color system is not a really linear uniform space. Furthermore, visual data were used to test the CIELAB‐based color‐difference formulas. In their original forms CIEDE2000 performed a little better than CMC, followed by CIELAB, and with CIE94 showing the worst performance for the combined data set under the viewing condition in this study. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Col Res Appl, 27, 349–359, 2002; Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/col.10081     

The new deviate visual functions improving the instrumental estimation on the visual color difference for the metamers with about 1° field size

Although the CIE1931 and 1964 color matching functions have been used in color specification for decades, many researchers, from Allen in 1970 to Hu and Houser in 2006, have found that there still exists a great visual mismatch on the discrimination of color difference as in terms of the CIE color matching functions. Hence, some significant error would be made on color specification due to employing the CIE1931 and 1964 color matching functions. Therefore, six color difference formulae developed from different experimental methods are used to derive various deviate visual functions (DVFs) respectively, and to investigate the effect of these DVFs on the performance of the color difference formulae tested in estimating visual color difference. The results indicate that the performance of the color difference formulae in estimating color difference is significantly improved by the deviate visual functions derived in this study. The CIE94 color difference formula has the best performance in predicting the total visual color difference (ΔV_T) using the DVFs and DVFIIs having the mean values 29 and 27 in PF/4 unit, respectively, while the CMC(l:c) the worst the ones 37 and 38. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Col Res Appl, 34, 115–127, 2009     

Color‐difference formula performance for several datasets of small color differences based on visual uncertainty

Visual uncertainty, while reported, is not used routinely when evaluating color‐difference formula performance in comparison with visual data; rather, data are analyzed assuming no uncertainty; that is, repeating the experiment would result in the identical average results. Previously, Shen and Berns developed three methods to determine whether a color‐difference formula was well‐fitting, under‐fitting, or over‐fitting visual data when visual uncertainty was considered, the method dependent on how the uncertainty was reported and the colorimetric sampling of the color‐difference stimuli. The “nonellipsoid standard error method” was used in the current analyses. Three datasets were evaluated: BFD‐P, Leeds, and Witt. For the BFD‐P data, incorporating visual uncertainty led to the same performance results as the average results, that CIEDE2000 was an improvement over CIE94, which was an improvement over CIELAB. For the Witt data, incorporating visual uncertainty led to the same performance results as the average results, that CIEDE2000 and CIE94 had equivalent performance, both an improvement over CIELAB. However, both formulas under‐fitted the visual results; thus, neither formula was optimal. For the Leeds dataset, the visual uncertainty analysis did not support the improvement of CIEDE2000 over CIE94 that occurred when evaluating the average results. Both formulas well fit the visual data. These analyses also provided insight into the tradeoffs between the number of color‐difference pairs and the number of observations when fitting a local contour of equal perceived color difference: In particular, increasing the number of observations was more important than increasing the number of color‐difference pairs. Finally, average standard error could be used to approximate visual uncertainty defined using STRESS. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Col Res Appl, 2011     

Suprathreshold color-difference ellipsoids for surface colors

The RIT-DuPont visual color-difference data [Color Res. Appl. 16, 297–316 (1991)] have been used to estimate contours of equal color-differences (ellipsoids) at 19 color centers, in CIELAB and x, y, Y/100 color spaces. The ellipsoid fits are better in the CIELAB space than in x, y, Y/100, since the design of the RIT-DuPont experiment emphasized directional balance in CIELAB. The ellipsoids estimated are hardly tilted with respect to L* or Y/100, and they appear to be in overall good agreement with those reported for object colors in recent publications. From the characteristics and accuracy of the RIT-DuPont experiment, the current ellipsoids can be considered highly reliable and representative of color discrimination under the observational conditions employed, these closely following the “reference conditions” recently suggested by the CIE for industrial color-difference evaluation [Color Res. Appl. 20, 399–403 (1995)]. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Col Res Appl, 22, 148–155, 1997     

Setting up acceptability tolerances: A case study

Current acceptance of goods for color by the United States Army depends on visual comparison against a standard and as many as eight limit samples. The Army wished to have a numerical method of setting color tolerances to be used with instrumental measurement. Preliminary work with the standards and limit samples indicated that acceptability ellipsoids oriented in the hue, chroma, and lightness directions in CIELAB color space should be set up. To establish the tolerances, we selected pairs of samples from a large number of previous submissions by industry. These pairs represented four graduated lightness steps, four graduated chroma steps, and four graduated hue steps. Six observers looked at each pair ten times, randomly interspersed with other pairs, and issued a pass-or-fail judgment each time. From these data we established lightness, chroma, and hue tolerance limits. For an olive green and a tan shade, these tolerances were roughly in the ratio 3:2:1; for a dark blue, the ratios were roughly 2:2:1. We wrote simple equations that can be used in order to determine quickly whether a sample passes or fails.     

Visual determination of suprathreshold color-difference tolerances using probit analysis

As part of a research program to improve the relationship between visual and numerical color-difference evaluation for industrial colorimetry, a color-difference tolerance data set for fitting and testing of color-difference metrics has been extended to include 156 individual color-tolerance determinations. These tolerances were designed to sample 19 color centers over a surface color gamut with balanced sampling of lightness and chromaticness differences. The tolerance determination procedures emphasized accurate estimation of population visual color-difference response and rigorous estimation of tolerance precision. Tolerance accuracy was confirmed by excellent agreement of these results and the majority of previous experiments on five color centers selected for CIE color-difference evaluations. The average uncertainty of the tolerance determinations was ± 11% of the tolerance value at a 2 ó level (95% confidence interval). The completed data set is suitable for estimating the parameters of color-difference metrics or testing the performance of such metrics. The color tolerances indicated the systematic lack of uniformity of the CIELAB space, in general agreement with previous experiments. A simple modification of the CIELAB color-difference metric was shown to account for much of the systematic lack of uniformity.     

Measuring the color of granite rocks: A proposed procedure

In spite of color being one of the physicochemical parameters most commonly used to characterize ornamental stone, there is yet no standardized protocol for measuring this parameter. Such a protocol is of particular importance for characterizing the color of heterogeneous surfaces, as in the case of granite. The aim of the present study was to determine the minimum area and the number of measurements required to characterize the color of granite rocks. A spectrophotometer and a tristimulus colorimeter, were used to measure the color of granite samples, and the measurements were expressed in CIE L*a*b* color system units. Three parameters were considered as variable factors: the type of rock (Labrador Claro, Grissal, Rosa Porriño, and Blanco Cristal), surface finish (polished, honed, sawn, and flamed), and target area (circular apertures of diameter 5, 8, 10, and 50 mm). The results of the application of multivariate analysis of variance and of the classical CIELAB formula and CIE L*a*b*‐based color‐difference formulae (i.e., CIE94 and CIEDE2000) to the data revealed that, although all considered factors affected the minimal area and the number of measurements required, the different circular apertures of both the instruments can be disregarded if the number of measurements and area recommended in this study are used. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Col Res Appl, 2010     

CIELAB color space boundaries under theoretical spectra and 99 test color samples

A color space is a three-dimensional representation of all the possible color percepts. The CIE 1976 L*a*b* is one of the most widely used object color spaces. In CIELAB, lightness L* is limited between 0 and 100, while a* and b* coordinates have no fixed boundaries. The outer boundaries of CIELAB have been previously calculated using theoretical object spectral reflectance functions and the CIE 1931 and 1964 observers under the CIE standard illuminants D50 and D65. However, natural and manufactured objects reflect light smoothly as opposed to theoretical spectral reflectance functions. Here, data generated from a linear optimization method are analyzed to re-evaluate the outer boundaries of the CIELAB. The color appearance of 99 test color samples under theoretical test spectra has been calculated in the CIELAB using CIE 1931 standard observer. The lightness L* boundary ranged between 6 and 97, redness-greenness a* boundary ranged between −199 and 270, and yellowness-blueness b* boundary ranged between −74 and 161. The boundary in the direction of positive b* (yellowness) was close to the previous findings. While the positive a* (redness) boundary exceeded previously known limits, the negative a* (greenness) and b* (blueness) boundaries were lower than the previously calculated CIELAB boundaries. The boundaries found here are dependent on the color samples used here and the spectral shape of the test light sources. Irregular spectral shapes and more saturated color samples can result in extended boundaries at the expense of computational time and power.     

Methods for quantifying metamerism. Part 2-Instrumental methods

This is the second part of this series of articles, in which the experimental data described in Part 1 are used to evaluate three types of metamerism indices. The results show that the index based upon one of the three advanced colour-difference formulae (CMC, BFD, and CIE94) gave a quite satisfactory prediction to the visual results. The degree of precision from these formulae is equal to or higher than the typical observer precision found in this study. A set of colour-matching functions was also derived. In comparison with those of the CIE 1964 standard colorimetric observer, the new set gives closer agreement with the visual results, particularly under source D_65. This new set could be used for indicating the degree of observer metamerism. Another set of experimental data was also assessed. Similar tests were conducted and the results confirm the earlier findings. The advanced colour-difference formulae can be confidently used for evaluating the degree of metamerism for industrial applications.     

Regression analysis to determine the optimum colour tolerance level for instrumental shade sorting

An investigation of the correlation between visual colour assessment and instrumental colour acceptance determination using regression analysis has been carried out. Three colour-difference equations, CIELAB, CMC(2:1) and CIE94(2:1:1), were studied in order to determine which is the best for generating a uniform colour space/microspace for allocating the colour population in shade sorting. Determination of optimum colour tolerance for further shade sorting was also undertaken. Some 1320 pairs of dyed samples distributing around 20 shade standards were measured instrumentally and also evaluated visually by a panel of 32 observers. Percentage rejection was plotted against colour difference and different mathematical regression relationships were then imposed. As a result, both CMC and CIE94 showed better correlation between the two colour assessment methods than the CIELAB colour-difference equation. Consequently, optimum colour tolerance limits were determined for subsequent development of shade sorting, with the findings being equally applicable to colour acceptance (shade passing).