Colour Science & Perception
what the eye settles, and what it cannot
The collection

Every essay — page 7

Page 7 of 54, continuing through the fields in the same order.

What light is What the eye does Matching and measuring Difference and uniformity What the brain does What a scene does What a camera does Where the model breaks What it takes to deliver it

SeriesObserversNamed objectsRefutationsSearch

Difference and uniformity

How far apart two colours are, whether the space you measured in was uniform, and how MacAdam's ellipses settle the question by measurement.

Three colour-difference formulae, disagreeing. ΔE76, ΔE94 and ΔE2000 for the same 9 pairs of colours. The largest disagreement between ΔE76 and ΔE2000 here is 26.6 units — larger than the threshold usually quoted for a just-noticeable difference, so the choice of formula can decide whether two colours count as matching.

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.

6 figures MacAdam's discrimination ellipses, drawn 10 times actual size. Twenty-five ellipses of colours indistinguishable from their centres. They are drawn at 10× because at true scale most are thinner than a line. Their areas vary by a factor of 74, which is the whole result: a step of the same size in xy means very different things in different places.

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.

7 figures The sRGB transfer function, and the gamma 2.2 curve it is not. Code value against relative luminance. The sRGB function is piecewise — a short linear segment near black, then a 2.4 power law with an offset — and it is close to but not the same as a plain 2.2 power law. Half-way along the axis of stored values sits at 21 per cent luminance, and half the luminance of white is at code 188.

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.

8 figures Threshold and suprathreshold contours, normalised to the same size. At five of MacAdam's centres: the measured just-noticeable-difference ellipse in grey and the ΔE2000 = 1 contour in gold, each scaled to the same mean radius so that only shape and orientation are being compared. A scale change preserves orientation exactly, so any rotation between the pair settles the question. They differ by 24° on average and by 70° at worst, and the ratio between their sizes varies 4.8-fold across the diagram — so no single factor turns one into the other.

A threshold is not a unit

MacAdam measured the smallest difference anyone could detect. ΔE2000 was fitted to how far apart plainly different colours look. The two are quoted interchangeably, and the contours they produce are not even the same shape.

5 figures A box tolerance and a ΔE tolerance around the same colour. A slice through CIELAB at L* 50, with the ΔE2000 = 1 contour traced point by point and a ±1 component box drawn over it. The contour is 2.1 times longer in one direction than the other, and the box is square. Of every sample either rule accepts, the two disagree about 74% — accepted by one specification and rejected by the other, on the same measurement.

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.

10 figures Distinguishable colours in sRGB, counted under two difference formulae. The gamut volume divided by the volume of a ΔE = 1 ellipsoid, integrated over the solid because that ellipsoid changes size and orientation from place to place. Under the 1976 formula the answer is 195,720; under ΔE2000 it is 41,819 — 4.68 times fewer, from the same solid and the same lattice. Both assume perfect packing, which nothing achieves, so each is an upper bound rather than a count of anything. The gap between them is the result: "how many colours are there" is a question about a metric before it is a question about vision.

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.

9 figures The ΔE = 1 contour at points across the L* = 55 plane, magnified 14×. Each closed curve is the set of colours exactly one unit of difference from the dot at its centre, traced by bisection along 30 directions and drawn 14 times life size. Under ΔE2000 the contours run from 0.68 to 5.07 CIELAB units across this slice — a ratio of 7.44 — and they are not circles and not aligned with each other. A formula whose contours were circles of one radius everywhere would be claiming that CIELAB is uniform, which is what the 1976 formula claims and what the measurements refuse.

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.

7 figures The worst triple found, under ΔE2000. Three colours, plotted on the a–b plane of CIELAB. Going from a to c directly is 123.645; going via b is 60.528, which is 51.0 per cent shorter. A distance cannot behave that way, and this one is the formula every colour tolerance in industry is written in. The colours are far apart, which is where the violation is largest; the same search confined to tolerance scale finds a smaller one that has not gone away.

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.

9 figures A chromatic line screen at 10.0 cycles per degree. The upper strip is the pattern as delivered and the lower one is the same pattern after each opponent channel has been low-passed at its own cutoff. Against a flat field of the same mean, the delivered pattern differs by up to ΔE00 14.22 and the filtered one by 7.77 — a ratio of 1.8. Every number quoted elsewhere for a difference of this kind is the first one.

A difference has no size

A colour difference formula answers a question about two large patches seen side by side. Applied to a pattern, it reports fourteen units where the eye is left with less than one — and the ratio depends on nothing but how finely the difference is spread.

6 figures How often two colour-difference formulae disagree about which pair is worse. Pairs of colours sampled in CIELAB, compared two at a time. A rank inversion is a case where one formula calls pair A worse and the other calls pair B worse; no monotone rescaling of either can remove one. The left bar of each group is the rate over the whole space and the right bar is the rate among pairs sitting near a tolerance of ΔE 1, where the decision is actually made — and it is between 35 and 44 per cent, against a coin flip at fifty.

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.

7 figures One colour difference, at four places in the visual field. The same pair of colours — ΔE00 22.0 at the fovea — with each of its three components divided by that channel's own threshold scaling at the stated eccentricity. What is left at 20° is 4.4, and its hue has turned by 26 degrees, because the red–green part is divided by more than the blue–yellow part. The swatches are the predicted colours, drawn where a reader will look straight at them; the figure states a prediction it cannot stage.

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.

9 figures One tolerance decision, at four spectral distances. Every column is a pair of samples ΔE00 1.0 apart for the observer a colorimeter models — solved to that value by bisection, so the instrument would report the same number for all four. What differs is how far apart the two spectra are, which is achieved by adding a metameric black the reference observer cannot see. The bands are what two hundred people report: from 1.13 at the ninety-fifth percentile when the spectra are the same shape to 2.32 when they are not, and the worst case reaches 3.7. No specification records the quantity on the horizontal axis.

A tolerance is a probability

A colorimeter reports one number and a specification compares it with another, and both are computed for an observer who does not exist. Handed to two hundred people, the same pair at ΔE00 1.0 is read from 0.8 to 3.7 — and which of those two ranges applies depends on something no specification records.

7 figures