CHROMATICITY-DISCRIMINATION ELLIPSES FOR SURFACE COLORS
CHROMATICITY-DISCRIMINATION ELLIPSES FOR SURFACE COLORS
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/col.5080110107
复制
发表时间：
1986-03-01
影响因子：
1.4
通讯作者：
RIGG, B
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
LUO, MR;RIGG, B
分析了表面颜色的可用颜色辨别数据，以产生单个色心的色度辨别椭圆。应用模拟误差表明，当样本分布在一个标准是不令人满意的，椭圆是不可靠的。共获得132个可靠的椭圆。6和a/B的值在色性图上系统地变化，可接受性、可感知性、纺织品和非纺织品椭圆的模式非常相似。新的实验数据，涉及超过400对样品对应于70个颜色中心，并评估对灰度被用来调整椭圆的相对大小。整体设定因子用于将不同来源的数据纳入一个共同的量表。然而，即使在允许不同的亮度水平之后，椭圆的大小仍然看起来是不规则的。使用新的结果来调整来自任何一组数据的各个椭圆的大小，例如，BFD、DF或MMB给出了形成更规则图案的椭圆。与麦克亚当椭圆相反，最小的椭圆出现在蓝灰色区域。我们的研究结果意味着，从同一组数据的椭圆的相对大小是错误的两个或更多的因素。比较不同颜色的色差似乎比以前认识到的要困难得多。这个问题似乎影响了所有主要的已公布数据组。
Available colour‐discrimination data for surface colours have been analysed to produce chromaticity‐discrimination ellipses for individual colour centres. Applying simulated errors showed that when the distribution of samples around a standard was unsatisfactory, the ellipses obtained were unreliable. A total of 132 reliable ellipses were obtained. The values of 6 and a/b varied systematically over the chro‐maticity diagram, the patterns from acceptability, perceptibility, textile, and non‐textile ellipses being very similar. New experimental data involving over 400 pairs of samples corresponding to 70 of the colour centres and assessed against a grey scale were used to adjust the relative sizes of the ellipses. Overall set factors were used to bring data from different sources onto a common scale. However, even after allowing for different lightness levels, the sizes of the ellipses still appeared to be irregular. Using the new results to adjust the sizes of the individual ellipses from any one group of data, e.g., BFD, DF, or MMB, gave ellipses forming a much more regular pattern. In contrast to the MacAdam ellipses, the smallest ellipses occurred in the blue‐grey region. Our results imply that the relative sizes of the ellipses from the same group of data are in error by a factor of two or more. Comparing colour differences for different colours appears to be much more difficult than has been previously realised. The problem appears to have affected all the major groups of published data.