CIELAB — where it appears
Named by 60 essays across 8 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
How far apart are two colours
ΔE is meant to be a distance with the property that the same number means the same perceived difference everywhere. Three successive formulae have tried, they disagree with each other by more than a just-noticeable difference, and the disagreement decides real matching questions.
MacAdam measured it
In a perceptually uniform space the just-noticeable-difference contours would be circles of equal size. MacAdam's ellipses are neither, by a factor of eighty — and transforming them into each candidate space settles which spaces improved matters and by how much.
The midpoint is not half
Code 128 sits halfway along the sRGB scale and carries about a fifth of white's luminance. Half the luminance is code 188. Almost every gradient, blur and resize on the web gets this wrong, and the errors are visible once known.
A viewing condition is an argument
An appearance model takes a stimulus and a situation. The second argument is not a refinement of the first — it is the content of the claim, and a model that returns an appearance from a colour alone has assumed a room without saying which.
A tolerance is a shape
A total colour difference below one, or every component within one — the two sound like the same requirement stated twice. They are different shapes, they disagree about most of what either accepts, and which one a supplier is held to is worth money.
The diagram was replaced in 1976
The CIE knew the 1931 diagram was badly distorted and published a better one. Half a century later almost every chromaticity plot in print is still the old one, and both are still printed filled edge to edge with colours no display can show.
Three cones, two axes
The retina does not send three receptor signals down the optic nerve. It sends a sum and two differences, and the reason falls out of the statistics of natural light rather than out of anything the eye intended.
Colour by catalogue
A colour order system arranges physical samples on a regular lattice so a person can find one and name it. The space it samples is not regular, and everything interesting about such systems is what happens at that mismatch.
Why there are four unique hues
Observers agree that four hues are elementary and that no colour is reddish green. Nothing in the three receptors predicts either fact, and the axes of every standard colour space miss the four by tens of degrees.
The triangle is a shadow
A display's gamut is drawn as a triangle on the chromaticity diagram, and coverage is quoted as a percentage of that triangle's area. Chromaticity has luminance divided out, so the triangle is a projection along the axis the eye cares most about — and the ratios computed on the solid are not the ratios computed on its shadow.
How many colours are there
Sixteen point seven million counts code values in a file format. Ten million distinguishable colours is a volume divided by the size of a just-noticeable difference — and the two difference formulae this site implements disagree about that size by a factor of nearly five.
Where the formula is not smooth
A colour difference formula is a distance, and a distance ought to vary gently. CIEDE2000's does not everywhere — it carries a hue-rotation term with a hard edge in it, and the discontinuity sits where a great many industrial samples live.
The colour is in the thickness
Transmittance is exponential in path length and the observer is linear, so doubling the depth of an absorbing medium squares the transmittance rather than halving the colour. A translucent object therefore has no one colour — its thin edge and its thick middle are different spectra of the same substance, and the hue moves between them.
A blown highlight turns
An exposure that clips nothing changes no hue at all. Once one channel reaches the ceiling the recorded hue rotates by as much as sixty-seven degrees, with nothing in the scene having changed colour — and every response a converter can make to that is an invention.
Neither gamut contains the other
Converting a picture to CMYK is described everywhere as a reduction, as though the press were a smaller version of the screen. Measured as solids, the press reaches eleven per cent of its volume outside sRGB while sRGB reaches fifty-four per cent of its volume outside the press — and in the cyans the press wins by seventy per cent of chroma.
A gradient is a path
Two colours fix the ends of a blend and nothing else. The middle is decided by the space the interpolation happens in, and four spaces in daily use put the halfway point of one ordinary gradient as much as thirty-seven units of colour difference apart.
A difference is not a distance
Two earlier essays here said that CIEDE2000 violates the triangle inequality and left it at that. Searching for the violation finds a detour half the length of the direct route, a smaller one inside a five-unit ball, and a second defect nobody mentions — ΔE94 is not even symmetric.
Which of two is worse
Two colour-difference formulae disagree about which of two pairs is the larger difference in thirteen per cent of comparisons overall — and in forty-three per cent of comparisons among pairs sitting near a tolerance of one unit, which is where every acceptance decision is actually made.
A difference has no place
A colour difference formula answers a question about two patches somebody is looking straight at. Move the same pair ten degrees into the periphery and a third of it is left — and it has turned twenty-four degrees of hue, because the three channels give out at three different rates.
A colour has a name
Every quantity here is a number, and the question a reader arrives with is what colour something is called. The eleven basic terms of English divide the space into territories that differ by a factor of five, the metric accounts for fifteen per cent of that, and one of the eleven focal colours cannot be shown on this page at all.
A catalogue is not a vocabulary
A colour order system is a regular lattice, because a person has to be able to find a page. Sorted by what its chips would be called, that lattice comes apart into piles differing by a factor of three — and a fifth of all one-step moves in it change the name.
There is no word for that colour
The naming model built this phase gives a saturated cyan the name green, calls part of a chromatic ring grey, and puts one of the eleven focal colours outside what a display can show. Each failure is a measurement rather than a disclaimer, and together they say what a vocabulary is that eleven points and a distance are not.
A name moves with the room
Eleven basic colour terms are quoted as centroids in CIELAB and a colour is named by which one it is nearest. Two things nobody records decide the answer — which distance function is used, which renames a fifth of the displayable gamut, and which room the colour is in, which renames more than a quarter of it.
A name in the model's own words
The eleven basic colour terms move when the room does, and the obvious objection is that they were being measured in a space with no room in it. Quoting them in an appearance model's own coordinates instead does not shrink the renaming — it grows it by four per cent — and the space alone renames an eighth of the gamut with the room held still.
The eye weights where the light is not
A brightened sheet returns a quarter more light than arrives at 430 nanometres, and it is three tenths of one per cent brighter for it. The luminous efficiency function is 0.017 there against 1.0 in the middle of the band, so the whole effect lands in the blue-yellow axis — brighter than white is a colour claim wearing a brightness word.
Whiteness is mostly the lamp
The CIE whiteness formula ranks white samples the way people do, which is what it was built for and is not in question. What is in question is what it is a measurement of — take the ultraviolet out of the instrument and 82 per cent of the scale collapses, because the part that separates a premium sheet from an ordinary one was contributed by the lamp.
No diagram makes them circles
Every chromaticity diagram is a projective picture of the same measurement, so how badly MacAdam's ellipses fail to be circles can be minimised over the whole family of them. The best plane there is still leaves the average ellipse twice as long as it is wide — which makes the residual a fact about the eye rather than about anybody's choice of primaries.
A difference needs a basis too
A linear change of coordinates leaves every colour match exactly where it was. A cube root does not commute with one — so a lightness–chroma space, and every colour difference computed in it, is a property of the basis that happened to be in place before the nonlinearity. CIELAB's basis was chosen in 1931 for reasons that had nothing to do with difference.
Which of these is a convention
Nine ordinary sentences from this collection, put through one test — do they mean the same thing after the observer's three curves are replaced by a nonsingular combination of themselves? Five survive and four do not, and none of the four is wrong, because each is a statement about a set of coordinates being read as a statement about an eye.
No basis is good at both
The same nine numbers decide how well a von Kries gain reproduces a change of light and how nearly a lightness–chroma space makes the discrimination ellipses circles. Minimise either one and the other collapses. The basis built from the receptors is best at neither and is the only entry in the table respectable at both.
A compression goes below the floor
Elsewhere this collection minimised the anisotropy of MacAdam's ellipses over every chromaticity diagram there is, found 2.02, and called the residual a property of the eye. It is a property of the eye seen through a projective picture. A cube root after the right basis reaches 1.61 on the same twenty-five ellipses.
The exponent was never the argument
A century of colour science has argued about whether the eye's response is a cube root, a square root or a logarithm. Minimise the anisotropy of MacAdam's ellipses over every basis, at each of eight exponents, and the floor moves by under three per cent between a cube root and a tenth root — while the basis moves it by a factor of two.
An ellipse is not a ring of points
For eleven rounds of argument the distortion a colour space does to MacAdam's ellipses by mapping forty-eight points round each one and dividing the longest radius by the shortest. The minimum sits in a notch whose width is the reciprocal of the answer, so the method was accurate wherever the answer was small and short by a factor of two where it was large.
Three numbers for one ellipse
How far a colour space is from making a discrimination contour circular has three different answers — what a coarse sample of the boundary reports, what a converged sample of a contour of stated size reports, and what the map's own derivative says. They differ by up to a factor of two, they mean different things, and only one of them is what the question is asking.
How wrong would the data have to be
Twenty-five ellipses measured on one observer in 1942 are the ruler every colour space here is judged against, and they have never been given an error. Rather than invent one, the question is turned round, and asks how large an error would have to be before the ranking changed.
Twenty-five is a sample of the diagram
A colour space's uniformity score is the mean of twenty-five numbers, and a mean of twenty-five numbers has a standard error those twenty-five numbers determine. Nothing has to be quoted to compute it, and three of the seven adjacent pairs in this collection's ranking survive it.
A deviation is not a difference
The previous round priced twenty departures in colour differences and treated each number as a property of the thing that departed. Every one of them is a product of two factors — how far the reading moved, which is linear and belongs to the departure, and what a unit of that movement is worth where it landed, which is not linear and belongs to the colour. Dimming one surface sixteen times scales the first by exactly sixteen and the second by eight.
The straight piece under the cube root
CIELAB's lightness is described everywhere as a cube root and below a stated luminance it is a straight line, spliced on with two constants chosen so the join is exact in value and in slope. Every black a delivery chain reaches is inside that straight piece — a press black at L* 2.4, a projected black at 1.1 — where the compression does not compress, the price of a deviation is flat to two parts in a thousand, and the second derivative the composition of two departures needs does not exist.
The mixture line bows
Grassmann's second law says an additive mixture is exactly linear in tristimulus values, and tested here it is exact to floating point. Nothing downstream of the three numbers preserves it. The physical half-and-half mixture of two colours sits a median of 5.5 colour differences from the midpoint of their two readings and up to thirty; on a green and a blue display primary it is twenty-one, which is a quarter of the distance between them.
A contrast control is three controls
A tone curve is a function of one number at a time and knows nothing about hue. Applied to each channel separately it rotates a hue circle by up to seventeen degrees, raises chroma by a factor of 1.27 at ordinary strength, and lifts lightness — so a photographer who moves a contrast slider has moved three things and the interface names one of them. All three scale with the curve's strength, monotonically, and the hue rotation depends on which hue it is.
A tolerance has a grain
A colour tolerance pulled back into tristimulus values is a long thin shape, and across the whole sRGB cube its shortest axis points the same way, fifteen degrees off at the median — the direction in which X rises as Y falls, which is the direction of a*. So what one colour difference allows depends on which way a delivery drifts. An instrument's X filter may age 1.4 per cent before the tolerance is used up, its Z filter 5.1, and the light on the sample 9.3.
The appearance model has no straight piece
CIELAB's lightness is a straight line below L* 8, so a deviation near black has a fixed price and a black has a floor under it. CIECAM16 has no such piece. Its lightness near zero goes as the luminance to a power set by the room, the price of a deviation rises without limit as the black deepens — as Y to the power −0.44 in a lit room and −0.58 in a dark one — and on a projected black a lightness unit in the model allows under half the luminance change a unit of L* allows.
The straight line is not the shortest gradient
A colour difference formula says what a small step costs at every colour, and that is enough to ask which path between two colours is shortest. It is not the straight line: between red and green the shortest path bows thirteen CIELAB units away, saves four per cent — and stays inside sRGB on every step where the straight line leaves it. The formula's own answer for the two endpoints, meanwhile, is neither length.
Two uniform spaces disagree about between
ΔE₀₀'s own local behaviour says which colours lie between two colours, and so does CAM16-UCS's. They do not agree. On cyan to magenta the two shortest paths run fifteen CIELAB units apart — more than either runs from the straight line — and on that gradient ΔE₀₀ would rather have the straight line than CAM16-UCS's answer. Getting the comparison at all takes noticing that one of the two has no local metric: its published difference is a Euclidean distance raised to the power 0.63, and a power below one has an infinite derivative at zero.
A gamut charges a gradient nothing
On red to green the shortest path happened to stay inside sRGB where the straight line did not, and that was called a coincidence of mechanism. Made into a measurement it is not a coincidence: constraining a path to stay inside the gamut costs less of the metric's own length than the relaxation's own noise, on every gradient tested — including the ones whose free shortest path is outside at fifteen of its twenty-one steps. The gamut's boundary and the metric's cheap region point the same way, and the price of the constraint is nothing.
White turns a hue, and the models part at blue
Mix a saturated light with white and its hue changes as well as its saturation — the Abney effect, and the reason lines of constant perceived hue curve in a chromaticity diagram. Asked what adding white does to the twenty-four most saturated colours a display makes, CIECAM16, CIELAB and Oklab all turn the hue. About reds they agree: CIECAM16 turns within a degree of Oklab, whose hue was fitted to observers' constant-hue judgements. About the display's blue they do not: Oklab turns sixteen degrees, CIECAM16 four, and CIELAB nine the other way.
A third space breaks the tie only once
ΔE₀₀ and CAM16-UCS disagree about which colours lie between two colours. Oklab was the obvious tie-breaker, and it breaks the tie on one gradient of five: on red to blue its path runs within six CIELAB units of CAM16-UCS's and twenty-nine from ΔE₀₀'s. On red to green and cyan to magenta it keeps to CIELAB's straight line while both others bow, and on blue to yellow it bows further than either. Each of the three spaces is the odd one out somewhere. Asking also exposed a CAM16-UCS path that had never converged.
A press makes the cheap route a search
Holding a gradient inside a display's gamut cost nothing measurable, and the essay that found it credited the gamut's convexity. A press's gamut is not convex: 216 of 630 straight lines between colours on its own hue ring leave it. Holding gradients inside the press still costs little at best, a median of a tenth of a per cent. But the best route depends on where the relaxation starts, the free path is the best start on one gradient of ten, and on half of them some start is trapped at more than twice the free length. On the display no start is trapped.
A projection has no reason to detour
Holding a gradient inside a press by penalising the excursion turned the gamut's price from a number into a search: on five of ten crossing gradients some starting point leaves the relaxation trapped at more than twice the free length, and the spread across six starts runs to 271 per cent of the free path. Replacing the penalty with a projection — take the free step, then move each point to the nearest printable colour — leaves no trap on any gradient and a spread of 0.06 to 2.4 per cent.
White drains the blue last in every model
CIECAM16 says a dab of white costs a deep red wall four times the colour it costs a dark blue one, and the experiment proposed to test it asked whether observers lose colour in that hue order. Held at equal luminance and given equal doses of white, twenty-four display hues are ordered alike by CIECAM16, CIELAB and Oklab — an orange loses fastest and a blue slowest in all three. So the order cannot tell the models apart. What does is how much slower the blue is: CIECAM16 has it losing a sixteenth of what the orange loses, CIELAB and Oklab about a quarter. That ratio is the number an observer study has to measure.
A margin costs a press its corners
A gradient held inside a coated press by projection was predicted to tear if the press were first shrunk by a safety margin, at any pinch narrow enough for the shrinking to cut. The press has no such pinch: shrunk by any margin up to thirty CIELAB units it stays in one piece, and projected routes on it are neither trapped nor torn. What a margin costs is concentrated at the corners — the solid yellow moves nearly four times the margin to get inside, like the tip of a 31-degree spike.
The blue resists through the model's denominator
CIECAM16 says a saturated blue is nearly impervious to added white: at equal luminance and an equal dose it loses a sixteenth of what an orange loses, where CIELAB and Oklab say a quarter. The model has two obvious places for that to come from — a hue factor fitted to make colourfulness equal across hues, and the sum of cone signals it divides its opponent signals by. Setting the hue factor to one changes nothing. Replacing the sum with the model's own achromatic signal makes the blue lose 0.233 of the orange's loss, beside CIELAB's 0.221 and Oklab's 0.223. The disagreement is one denominator.
A tolerance's own unit rounds the corners
Shrinking a coated press by a margin in CIELAB units made its corners pay several times the margin — the solid yellow nearly four. A print buyer states a margin in ΔE₀₀, and in that unit the corners pay about half as much: six of nine saturated end colours move within a third of the margin, and only the solid yellow is still sharper than a cube's corner. The prediction that the dark corners would stay sharp was wrong; they round too. What the tolerance's unit costs instead is volume — two ΔE₀₀ keep two thirds of the press where two CIELAB units kept four fifths.
The yellow stays sharp because it leans
A safety margin stated in ΔE₀₀ rounds almost every corner of a coated press, and leaves the solid yellow nearly as sharp as a cube's corner. The explanation offered was that the yellow's tongue points up towards lightness as well as out in chroma, so ΔE₀₀ — which shortens chroma at yellow five times and lightness one and a half — shortens it less than a pure chroma spike. Measured from the press's own cells, the tongue leans 23 degrees, less than predicted, and a cone about that axis rescaled by ΔE₀₀ accounts for the yellow's opening to within ten degrees; about a chroma axis it would open twenty-two degrees wider. ΔE₀₀'s own low hue weight at yellow, offered as the alternative, works the other way: it rounds the yellow. And the same account fails at every other corner.
Nine black levels sharpened the press's corners
Three essays measured how far a safety margin pushes the corners of a coated press inward, and found them sharper than anything a smooth solid would have: the solid yellow moving nearly four times the margin, every corner past a cube's. Read by their ink recipes, three of the nine corners are vertices and six are edges, and each has a shape the press model's own derivatives state exactly. Against that shape the edges moved a quarter to two thirds too far. The reason is not the press. It is how the press was built: as three-ink solids at nine levels of black with nothing between them, so that every face black helps to make was scalloped. Walked at thirty-three levels, every corner moves within seven per cent of its own tangent shape, three of the nine are rounder than a cube's corner, and the solid yellow moves 3.2 times the margin, not 3.8.
The tolerance unit opens every edge
On a finely sampled press every corner moves under a CIELAB margin as a perfect corner of its own shape would, the shape read off the press model's derivatives. A print buyer states the margin in ΔE₀₀, and the census in that unit had been explained one corner at a time. Carried into ΔE₀₀'s local metric, the same shapes explain all nine at once: each of the six edges' predicted move lies within a tenth of the margin of the census's, and each vertex's within a seventh. ΔE₀₀ opens the edges from 67–141 degrees to 123–157, nearly faces, because a unit along chroma is three to five CIELAB units at these colours. The solid yellow's cone opens only to 59 degrees and stays the one corner sharper than a cube's. Without its chroma term, ΔE₀₀ would leave every corner as sharp as CIELAB does, or sharper.
The blue corner has nothing to twist
A safety margin's cost at each corner of a coated press is predicted by the corner's own shape, read off its ink recipe and carried into whatever unit the margin is stated in — for nine corners, none of them blue. At a hue near 275 degrees ΔE₀₀ has a rotation term that couples chroma and hue, and the prediction was that leaving it out would miss the press's blue corner by more than a tenth of the margin. At the blue corner the term is strong: ΔE₀₀'s local matrix correlates a chroma step with a hue step by three quarters. And it changes the prediction by three hundredths. The blue corner and its edges are already blunt in CIELAB — none moves more than 1.3 times a margin — and a corner that is nearly a face has nothing for a shear to twist.
A display's blue is sharp where the rotation is not
ΔE₀₀'s rotation term shears chroma into hue near a CIELAB hue of 275 degrees, and at a press's blue corner it had nothing to act on because the corner was blunt. The prediction was that a display's blue — an additive primary — would be a sharp corner, and that there the rotation would change how far a safety margin moves it by more than a tenth. The first half holds: sRGB's blue moves 3.35 times a CIELAB margin and BT.2020's 3.17, against the press's 1.25, and insetting the curved gamut directly confirms it to the second decimal. The second half fails, twice. A display's blue sits at 306 degrees, thirty past the rotation's centre, where the term grips a quarter as hard; and ΔE₀₀ blunts the corner to 1.42 by compressing its chroma sevenfold. Along the edge from blue to cyan the hue does pass through 275 and the grip reaches −0.87 — where the edge is nearly a face. Nowhere near either display's blue does the rotation move a prediction by four hundredths.
The yellow is sharp where the tolerance unit does not compress
A safety margin moves each corner of a display's gamut inward by a multiple of itself that depends on the corner's shape. In CIELAB, sRGB's blue is its sharpest corner and its yellow among its bluntest; carried into ΔE₀₀, the order turns over, and the yellow becomes the sharpest corner of both sRGB and BT.2020. The prediction was that the yellow keeps its sharpness because its faces run along lightness, where ΔE₀₀'s weighting is largest at the yellow's L* of 97. Taking ΔE₀₀ apart length by length says otherwise. Its lightness weighting changes the yellow's move by nothing. Its chroma compression — the term that opens every other corner — does, on its own, bring every other corner of both displays under 1.35 times a margin, and leaves the yellow at 1.78. Of the yellow's three directions only one runs along chroma; at the other corners two or three do, and a metric that compresses chroma pulls those together and flattens the corner between them.
An appearance model flattens the blue by its hue
A safety margin moves a corner of a display's gamut inward by a multiple of itself set by the corner's shape, and the unit the margin is written in decides the shape. In ΔE₀₀ the yellow is the sharpest corner of an sRGB and a BT.2020 display, because its sharpness lies across hue where ΔE₀₀'s chroma compression cannot reach it. CAM16-UCS compresses colourfulness less steeply, and the prediction was that it would leave the blue sharper than the yellow. It leaves the yellow sharpest, at 1.66 times a margin on both displays, and flattens the blue to 1.17 and 1.10 — the bluntest corner of all twelve. Its colourfulness does what the prediction said: on its own it would sharpen the blue past the yellow. Its hue scale undoes that. At a display's blue one degree of CIELAB hue is three and a half degrees of the appearance model's, and a unit that counts hue that finely there spreads the blue's directions apart until the corner is nearly a face.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
GamutCIEDE2000Perceptual uniformityToleranceΔESpecificationMacAdam's ellipsesColour differenceLightnessCIECAM16Gamut mappingThreshold