
doi: 10.1002/col.21751
handle: 10481/96465
A set of 10 color pairs was proposed and produced in 2002 to show the advantages of the CIEDE2000 color‐difference formula with respect to CIELAB. These 10 color pairs illustrated each of the five corrections to CIELAB proposed by CIEDE2000. The 10 color pairs were visually assessed, under reference conditions close to those proposed by CIEDE2000, by two groups of 31 and 21 inexperienced observers, using two different gray scales. Average visual results in these experiments fitted CIEDE2000 predictions much better than CIELAB, as shown by a decrease of Standardized Residual Sum of Squares values of about 20 units. Current visual results showed only the improvement of CIEDE2000 upon CIELAB in predictions of perceived color differences, but they are not recommended for testing new advanced color‐difference formulas. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Col Res Appl, 38, 429–436, 2013.
791, [INFO.INFO-TI]Computer Science [cs]/Image Processing [eess.IV], CIELAB, CIEDE2000, color-difference metrics
791, [INFO.INFO-TI]Computer Science [cs]/Image Processing [eess.IV], CIELAB, CIEDE2000, color-difference metrics
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 14 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
