Abstract:The CIELAB lightness and chroma values of pixels in five of the eight ISO SCID natural images were modified to produce sample images. Pairs of images were displayed on a calibrated monitor and assessed by a panel of 12 observers with normal color vision using a categorical judgment method. The experimental results showed that assuming the lightness parametric factor k(L)=1 to predict color differences in images, CIELAB performed better than CIEDE2000, CIE94, or CMC, which is a different result to the one found in color-difference literature for homogeneous color pairs. However, observers perceived CIELAB lightness and chroma differences in images in different ways. To fit current experimental data, a specific methodology is proposed to optimize k(L) in the color-difference formulas CIELAB, CIEDE2000, CIE94, and CMC. From the standardized residual sum of squares (STRESS) index, it was found that the optimized formulas, CIEDE2000(2.3:1), CIE94(3.0:1), and CMC(3.4:1), performed significantly better than their corresponding original forms with lightness parametric factor k(L)=1. Specifically, CIEDE2000(2.3:1) performed the best, with a satisfactory average STRESS value of 25.8, which is very similar to the 27.5 value that was found from the CIEDE2000(1:1) formula for the combined weighted dataset of homogeneous color samples employed at the development of this formula [J. Opt. Soc. Am. A25, 1828 (2008), Table 2]. However, fitting our experimental data, none of the four optimized formulas CIELAB(1.5:1), CIEDE2000(2.3:1), CIE94(3.0:1), and CMC(3.4:1) is significantly better than the others. Current results roughly agree with the recent CIE recommendation that color difference in images can be predicted by simply adopting a lightness parametric factor k(L)=2 in CIELAB or CIEDE2000 [CIE Publication 199:2011]. It was also found that the different contents of the five images have considerable influence on the performance of the tested color-difference formulas.

Evaluating the Quality of Daylight Simulators Using Metameric Samples

Evaluation of Daylight Simulators. Part 2; Assessment of the Quality of Daylight Simulators Using Actual Metameric Pairs†

Evaluation of daylight simulators. Part 1; Colorimetric and spectral variations

Sky Quality Meter measurements in a colour changing world

Quality of LED Based Daylight Simulators

Colour Matching Comparison Between Spectrophotometric and Multispectral Imaging Measurements

Quantifying the suitability of CIE D50 and a simulators based on LED light sources

A Multispectral Imaging Approach to Colour Measurement and Colour Matching of Single Yarns Without Winding

Comparing The Quality Of The Led Based And Conventional Cie Illuminant Simulators

Methods for Quantifying Metamerism. Part 2‐instrumental Methods

Impact of spectral power distribution of daylight simulators on whiteness specification for surface colors

Effect of Primary Peak Wavelength and Stimulus Size on Metameric Failure Through Color Difference Evaluations

The Prediction of Perceived Colour Differences by Colour Fidelity Metrics

Improving the accuracy of circadian lighting simulation with field measurement

Color-difference evaluation for digital images using a categorical judgment method.

A Parametric Colour-difference Study on the Separation and CMF Effects.

Testing Methods to Estimate Spectral Reflectance Using Datasets under Different Illuminants

Color Difference Evaluation for Wide-Color-gamut Displays.

Testing the performance ofCIECAM02from 100 to 3500 cd/m<SUP>2</SUP>

Testing Uniform Colour Spaces Using Colour Differences of a Wide Colour Gamut

Digital Camera-Based Appearance Meter (AppMeter)