OSA's Digital Library

Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

| EXPLORING THE INTERFACE OF LIGHT AND BIOMEDICINE

  • Editors: Andrew Dunn and Anthony Durkin
  • Vol. 8, Iss. 5 — Jun. 6, 2013

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

Haoxue Liu, Min Huang, Guihua Cui, M. Ronnier Luo, and Manuel Melgosa  »View Author Affiliations


JOSA A, Vol. 30, Issue 4, pp. 616-626 (2013)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/JOSAA.30.000616


View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (1789 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

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 kL=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 kL 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 kL=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. A 25, 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 kL=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.

© 2013 Optical Society of America

OCIS Codes
(100.2960) Image processing : Image analysis
(110.3000) Imaging systems : Image quality assessment
(330.1690) Vision, color, and visual optics : Color
(330.1710) Vision, color, and visual optics : Color, measurement
(330.1730) Vision, color, and visual optics : Colorimetry
(330.1715) Vision, color, and visual optics : Color, rendering and metamerism

ToC Category:
Vision, Color, and Visual Optics

History
Original Manuscript: October 8, 2012
Revised Manuscript: December 22, 2012
Manuscript Accepted: January 27, 2013
Published: March 11, 2013

Virtual Issues
Vol. 8, Iss. 5 Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

Citation
Haoxue Liu, Min Huang, Guihua Cui, M. Ronnier Luo, and Manuel Melgosa, "Color-difference evaluation for digital images using a categorical judgment method," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 30, 616-626 (2013)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/vjbo/abstract.cfm?URI=josaa-30-4-616


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. CIE, “Improvement to industrial colour-difference evaluation,” CIE Publication 142:2001 (CIE Central Bureau, 2001).
  2. C. Oleari, M. Melgosa, and R. Huertas, “Generalization of color-difference formulas for any illuminant and any observer by assuming perfect color constancy in a color-vision model based on the OSA–UCS system,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 28, 2226–2234 (2011). [CrossRef]
  3. CIE, “Methods for evaluating colour differences in images,” CIE Publication 199:2011 (CIE Central Bureau, 2011).
  4. M. Stokes, “Colorimetric tolerances of digital images,” Master’s thesis (Rochester Institute of Technology, 1991).
  5. CIE, “Colorimetry,” CIE Publication 15:2004 (CIE Central Bureau, 2004).
  6. ISO/CIE, “Colorimetry—part 4: 1976 L*a*b* colour space,” Joint ISO/CIE Standard: ISO 11664-4:2008(E)/CIE S 014-4/E:2007 (ISO, 2008).
  7. F. J. J. Clarke, R. McDonald, and B. Rigg, “Modification to the JPC79 colour-difference formula,” J. Soc. Dyers Colour. 100, 128–132 and 281–282 (1984). [CrossRef]
  8. CIE, “Industrial colour-difference evaluation,” CIE Publication 116:1995 (CIE Central Bureau, 1995).
  9. J. Uroz, M. R. Luo, and J. Morovic, “Perception of colour difference between printed images,” in Colour Science: Exploiting Digital Media, L. W. MacDonald and M. R. Luo, eds., (Wiley, 2002), pp. 49–73.
  10. T. Song and M. R. Luo, “Testing color-difference formulae on complex images using a CRT monitor,” in Proceedings of IS&T and SID Eighth Color Imaging Conference (The Society for Imaging Sciences and Technology, 2000), pp. 44–48.
  11. J. E. Gibson, M. D. Fairchild, and S. L. Wright, “Colorimetric tolerances of various digital image displays,” in Proceedings of IS&T and SID Eighth Color Imaging Conference (The Society for Imaging Sciences and Technology, 2000), pp. 295–300.
  12. C. Sano, T. Song, and M. R. Luo, “Colour differences for complex images,” in Proceedings of IS&T and SID 11th Color Imaging Conference (The Society for Imaging Sciences and Technology, 2003), pp. 121–126.
  13. F. H. Imai, N. Tsumura, and Y. Miyake, “Perceptual color difference metric for complex images based on Mahalanobis distance,” J. Electron. Imaging 10, 385–393 (2001). [CrossRef]
  14. M. R. Luo, G. Cui, and B. Rigg, “The development of the CIE 2000 colour-difference formula: CIEDE2000,” Color Res. Appl. 26, 340–350 (2001). [CrossRef]
  15. X. Zhang and B. A. Wandell, “A spatial extension of CIELAB for digital color image reproduction,” in Proceedings of the SID Symposiums (The Society for Information Display, 1996), pp. 731–734.
  16. D. G. Lee, M. R. Luo, G. Cui, and B. C. Ahn, “Evaluating colour differences for images,” in Proceedings of the 4th European Conference on Colour in Graphics, Imaging, and Vision (The Society for Imaging Sciences and Technology, 2008), pp. 12–15.
  17. ISO, “Graphic technology—prepress digital data exchange—part 1: CMYK standard colour image data (CMYK/SCID),” ISO 12640-1: 1997 (ISO, 1997).
  18. H. Liu, M. Huang, M. Xie, and M. Zhu, “The effect of image’s contents on the visual color difference for digital images,” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Congress on Image and Signal Processing (The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 2010), pp. 2356–2359.
  19. M. Xie, “Study on methods of image quality evaluation based on the color-difference formula,” Master’s thesis (Beijing Institute of Graphic Communication, 2010) (in Chinese).
  20. M. Xie, H. Liu, and M. Huang, “Subjective evaluation experiment and data analysis of color difference for digital images,” in Proceedings of the 31st International Congress on Imaging Science (The Society for Imaging Sciences and Technology, 2010), pp. 180–183.
  21. R. Huertas, M. Melgosa, and E. Hita, “Influence of random-dot textures on perception of suprathreshold color differences,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 23, 2067–2076 (2006). [CrossRef]
  22. S. S. Guan and M. R. Luo, “Investigation of parametric effects using large colour differences,” Color Res. Appl. 24, 356–368 (1999). [CrossRef]
  23. M. R. Luo, “Development of colour-difference formulae,” Rev. Prog. Color. Relat. Top. 32, 28–39 (2002). [CrossRef]
  24. P. A. García, R. Huertas, M. Melgosa, and G. Cui, “Measurement of the relationship between perceived and computed colour difference,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 24, 1823–1829 (2007). [CrossRef]
  25. M. Huang, H. Liu, G. Cui, and M. R. Luo, “Testing uniform colour spaces and colour-difference formulae using printed samples,” Color Res. Appl. 37, 326–335 (2012). [CrossRef]
  26. E. Kirchner and N. Dekker, “Performance measures of color-difference equations: correlation coefficient versus standardized residual sum of squares,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 28, 1841–1848 (2011). [CrossRef]
  27. E. C. Poulton, “Models for biases in judging sensory magnitude,” Psychol. Bull. 86 (4), 777–803 (1979). [CrossRef]
  28. R. Shamey, L. M. Cárdenas, D. Hinks, and R. Woodard, “Comparison of naïve and expert subjects in the assessment of small color differences,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 27, 1482–1489 (2010). [CrossRef]
  29. M. Huang, H. Liu, G. Cui, M. R. Luo, and M. Melgosa, “Evaluation of threshold colour differences using printed samples,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 29, 883–891 (2012). [CrossRef]
  30. M. Melgosa, R. Huertas, and R. S. Berns, “Performance of recent advanced color-difference formulas using the standardized residual sum of squares index,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 25, 1828–1834 (2008). [CrossRef]

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.


« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited