Three colour-difference formulae, disagreeing
Drawn at its defaults, in uniformity, measured. It takes 6 options, and the essays below show what each placement asks of it.
Called by 26 essays
the blast radius of changing 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.
Where the model breaksWhat the audit still cannot reach
Two rounds have now swept every declared width in this collection and one of its structural choices. Three structural choices remain, none of them has a multiplier to sweep, and the reason each resists is different — which makes the list a description of where this kind of audit ends rather than a queue of work.
Difference and uniformityTwo units with a light level disagree about lightness
ΔE₀₀ has no argument for how bright a display is. Two colour differences do: CAM16-UCS takes the room's adapting luminance, and ΔEITP — the difference defined for high-dynamic-range television — takes the stimulus's own absolute luminance. Twenty-three pairs at exactly one ΔE₀₀ grow in both as the display brightens, 2.1 times in ΔEITP and 1.5 in CAM16-UCS from a 5 to a 5,000 cd/m² white. But in ΔEITP the lightness part grows fastest, 2.7 times, and in CAM16-UCS it does not grow at all.
Difference and uniformityThe units part by hue, not by light level
Two colour differences with a light level in them were compared on a display running from 5 to 5,000 cd/m², and a prediction was drawn from how each divided a difference between lightness and chroma. Built into pairs that differ in lightness alone and in chroma alone, both units say the same thing about light level: as a display brightens, chroma differences gain on lightness differences — ΔEITP by a tenth, CAM16-UCS by a quarter. Where they part is hue. The appearance model moves every colour's balance by the same factor; ΔEITP moves the violets, reds and cyan-blues the other way, and at nine of twelve base colours the two units disagree about the direction.
Difference and uniformityThe shadows a unit counts are the ones a room removes
ΔEITP's growth with display brightness is largest in the dark greys, and dark greys are where a lit room's light reflected off the screen sits. One candela a square metre of veiling luminance removes 22 per cent of the difference the unit gives a step at the bottom of the scale on a 1,000-candela display and nothing measurable at the top. The same veil raises the growth the unit reports across display levels from a factor of six to a factor of seventeen, because it destroys a dim display's shadows first.
Difference and uniformityA lit room brings the units' medians together
As a display brightens, CAM16-UCS says chroma differences gain a quarter on lightness differences and ΔEITP says a tenth. All of the appearance model's movement comes from what the viewer is adapted to, and every calculation had the viewer adapted to the display alone. Give the room its share of the adaptation and the model's movement shrinks at every step: with a 20 cd/m² room supplying two thirds of it, the two units' medians fall by the same amount. What does not shrink is their disagreement about direction. The model still moves every colour the same way, ΔEITP still moves violets, reds and cyan-blues the other way, and in a lit room that becomes the whole of what separates them.
Difference and uniformityA guessed veil halves the error
A colour difference that takes a display's absolute luminance leaves out the light a room reflects off the screen, and on an ordinary display in an ordinary room that makes it wrong about the darkest greys by a factor of three. Giving the unit the veil as a declared argument fixes that when the veil is known. The worry was that it never would be — that a guessed argument is no better than none. It is better: any declared veil up to about twice the true one beats declaring none, and one middling guess for every room halves the worst error. What a guess cannot do is reach ten per cent; that needs the veil known within a sixth, which is what a luminance meter aimed at a black screen gives.
Difference and uniformityThe hue disagreement is the quantiser's
As a display brightens, the appearance model shifts every colour's balance between lightness and chroma by one factor, and ΔEITP shifts violets towards lightness and yellow-greens towards chroma. The proposed source was the perceptual quantiser acting on three cone-like signals at unequal levels. Replacing the quantiser with a pure power law and changing nothing else removes the disagreement exactly: every colour moves by a factor of one. With the quantiser, how far a colour moves follows the spread of its three signals, and which way follows where its S signal sits — above the other two, towards lightness; below, towards chroma.
Difference and uniformityA dimming panel has no single black
ΔEITP reads a display's shadows correctly only when it is told the floor under every pixel, and that floor has two parts: the room's light reflected off the screen and the display's own black. They fold into one declared number exactly, and on a bright LCD the display's part is the one that matters — leaving it out misreads the deepest shadows seventeenfold. A local-dimming panel breaks the folding, because its black changes with the picture: in a dark room its floors vary twenty-six times across one scene, and no single declaration comes within a factor of two and a half. A lit room squeezes them back into one number.
Difference and uniformityTwo floors trade the screen for the halo
A local-dimming panel in a dark room has no single black: its floor varies twenty-six times across a scene, and one declared floor misreads ΔEITP's grey steps by a factor of 2.6. The proposal was two floors, one for dimmed zones and one for lit ones, on the reasoning that a picture's zones cluster at the two ends. They do cluster, and two floors still do not work. Placed for the worst zone they halve the error and misread almost the whole screen a little; placed on the two clusters they read most of the screen exactly and misread the halo between as badly as one floor. How many floors a panel needs is set by its diffuser, not by the picture — and the only declaration that works everywhere is the backlight map.
Difference and uniformityAt the gamut's edge the reds move as far as the violets
As a display brightens, ΔEITP shifts a saturated colour's balance between lightness and chroma by an amount set by its three quantised signals, and CAM16-UCS shifts every colour alike. The largest shifts found so far were a yellow-green at ×0.63 and a dark blue at ×1.62, both at the census's edge — and the blue turns out to be a colour no BT.2020 display can show. Walked out to the display's real boundary, the yellow-greens go lower, to ×0.54, and the dark blues never pass ×1.35, because BT.2020's blue edge is at low chroma. The top of the range goes to the reds and red-purples at ×1.6: at the edge the L-minus-M term grows to two thirds of the S term. Pairing the two extremes still needs a third of the observers the violet experiment needs.
Difference and uniformityA display's red takes the reds' move and leaves the pair
At BT.2020's edge ΔEITP moved a dark red's balance between lightness and chroma furthest of any colour, ×1.64 from a dim display to a bright one, and the reason offered was BT.2020's red primary, a line far out at 630 nanometres. Moving that primary in along the spectral locus confirms it: the reds fall faster than any other hue, to ×1.40 at 615 nanometres and ×1.25 at 605, and Display P3, whose red is a 615 nm line to three ten-thousandths, gives the reds the same. The top of the range goes to a red-purple, which rises as the red moves in because BT.2020 had pushed it past its own peak. And the forced-choice pair the experiment needs is the same two colours on every display.
Difference and uniformityThe eye's own glare hides most of the halo
A local-dimming panel's black can be declared as two floors, and the pair misreads only the diffuser's halo round the bright content — by up to a factor of 2.7. The halo sits next to the light, and light scattered inside the viewer's eye puts a floor of its own there. Added under every grey step, the eye's veil hides the whole misreading in six of nine cases: every window, and the highlight and subtitles behind the narrowest diffuser. It leaves a sixth of the misreading's share for a small highlight behind the widest diffuser, and a quarter for subtitles, all of it in the halo's inner half — not its outer edge, as predicted. The panel dims by a zone's brightest pixel and the eye veils by its average, so a line of text lights the backlight fully and the eye a quarter. The viewing distance cancels.
Difference and uniformityA coloured highlight tints the halo it cannot hide
A local-dimming panel lights a zone for its brightest channel, so a pure red or blue highlight drives the backlight as hard as a white one and sends a fifth or a fourteenth of the light into the viewer's eye. The prediction was that a saturated highlight's veil would hide the halo's misread greys as a white one does, and add a colour. It hides far less. Behind the middle diffuser a white highlight hides the whole misreading; drawn red, blue, green or even yellow — nine tenths of white's luminance — it hides none of it. The yellow fails because a veil hides a grey step only in the cone signals it reaches, and yellow light reaches a fifth of the short-wave one. And where the veil does fall on a misread floor, it colours the error: the darkest greys are tinted by up to fifteen ΔEITP, and behind a red window, where the veil hides the lightness almost entirely, a fifth of the screen is tinted by more than a unit.
Difference and uniformityA warm room tints the black, not the halo
A local-dimming panel's black can be declared as two floors, the room's light reflected off the screen folded in, and the earlier censuses gave that light a hundredth of a candela, grey. Under a warm lamp it is not grey. The prediction was that a warm room would hide the halo's misreading in the long and middle cone signals, leave its short-wave part exposed, and tint the halo's dark greys towards blue. The tint is real and it is none of those things. With the floors declared in grey, a 2,700 K room putting a tenth of a candela on the screen tints every zone of a dark picture by more than one ΔEITP — up to 17.7 at the darkest grey — and the tint points towards the lamp's own orange, opposite blue. It is not the halo's: it is the whole black's, because a grey declaration has the floor's colour wrong everywhere. The prediction's conclusion holds by a different road. A grey step laid on a warm floor is partly a change of colour, so the warm room leaves seven tenths of the moon picture's grey steps misread where a grey room leaves none; and declaring the floors in the room's colour removes all of it but the halo's own.
Difference and uniformityAdapting to a warm room deepens the shadows' tint
A warm room's light reflected off a local-dimming screen tints the shadows of every dark picture when the screen's black is declared in grey — by up to 17.7 ΔEITP — and ΔEITP has no viewer in it. A viewer who has sat in a 2,700 K room all evening is adapted partly to the room, and adaptation to a warm white discounts warm light. The prediction was that a viewer adapted a third of the way to the room would see under half the tint, and one adapted two thirds of the way would see the darkest greys turn blue. Read through CIECAM16, the opposite happens in a dark picture. The tint the viewer sees grows at every step of adaptation: in the moon picture's darkest grey from 2.7 CAM16-UCS units for a viewer adapted to the display to 3.3, 3.9 and 4.4. The darkest greys never turn blue; they stay orange and fade. What turns blue is the mid-greys, whose light is the display's own and now looks cool. In the bright window picture the tint shrinks, and declaring the floor in the room's colour still removes it for every viewer.
Difference and uniformityA room sensor must read the lamp to a hundred kelvin
A local-dimming panel in a 2,700 K room leaves a dark picture's shadows tinted towards the lamp unless its black floor is declared in the room's colour, and declared exactly, that tint falls below a ΔEITP unit almost everywhere. A display learns its room from a sensor, and sensors are not exact. With the room putting a tenth of a candela on the screen, a temperature reading 14 mireds out — about a hundred kelvin, warmer or cooler — puts the tint back over a unit in the moon picture; so does a level read 12 per cent low or 13 per cent high, or a white placed a Duv of 0.003 off the locus. The tolerance is even in mireds and lopsided in kelvin, and it narrows to a third or a quarter for every tenfold rise in the room's light: ±54 mireds in a room of a hundredth of a candela, ±5 in a room of one. A bright picture forgives six times as much as a dark one. Declaring the room's colour solves the tint only for a display that can measure the room about as well as a colour meter does.
Difference and uniformityLamp and daylight together sit below the locus
A display that declares its room's light can remove the tint a warm room leaves in a dark picture's shadows, if it reads the light to about fourteen mireds and a Duv of 0.003. An evening room is often lit by a lamp and the last of the daylight at once, and a sensor that reports a colour temperature names a point on the Planckian locus that such a mixture need not occupy. The prediction was that a lamp-and-daylight mixture sits well above the locus, so a declaration from its temperature tints the moon picture beyond a unit at a tenth of a candela for every mixture. The mixtures sit below the locus, at a Duv of −0.002 to −0.005, because a straight line between two points on a curve that bends upward lies under it. Declared from their temperature, they tint the shadows beyond a unit only when a quarter to a half of the light is daylight, up to 1.24 units. Daylight alone sits above the locus, at +0.003, and its temperature-only declaration tints by 0.67 at a tenth of a candela and 1.39 at one, where a grey declaration — the display's own white — tints nothing. Declared in its own chromaticity, every mixture's tint stays at the halo's.
Difference and uniformityA sensor calibrated on lamps cannot read an LED
A display that declares its room's light in the light's own chromaticity keeps a dark picture's shadows untinted, and the chromaticity has to come from a sensor. The prediction was that a small three-channel sensor calibrated on a 2,700 K and a 6,500 K lamp reads mixtures of a lamp and daylight within 0.001, because they are mixtures of its calibration lights, and misreads phosphor LEDs by 0.003 to 0.006. The mixtures nearly hold: misread by up to 0.0023, past 0.001 from half daylight, because daylight is not a 6,500 K lamp — and at a tenth of a candela no mixture tints the moon picture by a unit. The LEDs are three times worse than predicted. Every one of thirty white LEDs built onto the Planckian locus is misread by 0.007 to 0.017, and every one tints the shadows by 1.7 to 3.6 units. The divide is not lamp against daylight but smooth against spiky: every Planckian lamp and mixture under 0.0035, every LED and fluorescent tube over 0.007.
Difference and uniformityNo calibration reads the lamps and the LEDs together
A three-channel ambient sensor pinned on two Planckian lamps reads every lamp and every lamp-and-daylight mixture well enough to keep a dark picture's shadows under a ΔEITP unit, and misreads every white LED badly enough to tint them by two to four. Its errors on the LEDs all point one way, and the prediction was that a matrix fitted in least squares to every light in a census would bring every LED under 0.004 while the lamps rose only towards 0.003. It does not. Fitted to the census, each light held out, the sensor's worst LED error falls from 0.017 to 0.0066 and its worst lamp error rises from 0.0033 to 0.0126; thirteen of forty-seven lights still pass a unit, among them the 2,700 K lamp the original calibration read exactly. A matrix exact on the lamp, daylight and one 4,000 K LED reads every mixture and every 4,000 K LED nearly perfectly and fails the 2,700 K LEDs, none read better than 0.0063. A fourth channel leaves six lights beyond a unit. Three broad channels have one matrix, and it can be right about one kind of spectrum.
Difference and uniformitySeven channels end the trade and lose the tube
A three-channel ambient sensor fitted to a room's forty-seven lights trades its error on LEDs against its error on lamps, and a fourth channel moved that trade without closing it. The prediction for more channels was that six, spread from 445 to 650 nm, bring every lamp, mixture and LED under a ΔEITP unit with the lamps within 0.0025 in the CIE 1960 plane, and that nothing short of eight reads the halophosphate tube. Six channels leave the 2,200 K lamp beyond a unit and the lamps at 0.0040; seven bring every lamp, mixture and LED in, with the LEDs and lamps both under 0.001, and the trade is gone — both families improve together. The halophosphate tube is read from six. But the triphosphor tube, held out of its own fit, is read only by three and four broad channels and lost by every finer sensor, its tint growing to thirty-three units at twelve channels. A sensor learns the lights it was fitted on, and a finer one extrapolates further from a light with no relative in the census.
Difference and uniformityRelatives, not twins, teach a sensor a tube
An ambient sensor of seven evenly spread channels, fitted to a room's forty-seven lights, reads every lamp, mixture and LED within a ΔEITP unit with each held out of its own fit, and loses the triphosphor tube, which nothing else in the census resembles — thirty-three units out at twelve channels. The prediction was that four triphosphor siblings, the same phosphors mixed for 3,000 to 5,000 K, would bring the tube within a unit at seven and eight channels and stop its rise past eight. They do both: the tube reads at 0.04 with seven channels and 0.06 with twelve, and seven or eight channels then read all fifty-one lights. A twin is not what does it. Three siblings, every one warmer than the tube and the nearest sixty mireds from it, read it within a unit at every count from five. What the siblings cost is paid at the finest sensors: at twelve channels the Planckian lamps' worst error rises fivefold, while from five to eight it moves by under a quarter.
Difference and uniformitySeven channels carry their noise as lightly as three
An ambient-light sensor of seven narrow channels, fitted to a room's forty-seven lights and four triphosphor siblings, reads every one of the fifty-one within a ΔEITP unit of a dim moon picture's tint, each light held out of its own fit. A fine sensor was expected to read chromaticity from small differences between neighbouring channels, with large weights of both signs that multiply every channel's noise. The prediction was that seven channels stay within a unit at a quarter of a per cent of channel noise and are no better than five at one per cent. The first half holds. The second fails completely: at one per cent seven channels still read every light's every one of a hundred readings within a unit, while five lose twenty-two lights. The premise was wrong. Seven channels' matrix barely cancels — its contributions sum with one sign — and per unit of noise it moves the reported chromaticity no more than three broad channels do.
Difference and uniformityA tilt moves every light's reading alike
An ambient-light sensor of seven narrow channels reads all fifty-one of a room's lights within a ΔEITP unit of a dim moon picture's tint and keeps them there through one per cent of independent noise on every channel, because its matrix barely cancels. A drift shared by the channels does not average out: as a photodiode warms its response tilts, rising at long wavelengths and falling at short. The prediction was that a tilt reaching ±1 per cent at the ends of the range leaves the seven-channel sensor within a unit for every light and that the twelve-channel sensor, whose Z row cancels, loses more lights than seven at every tilt. Seven channels hold to ±2 per cent, the worst light at 0.56. Twelve loses two lights at every tilt — the two it misreads with no tilt at all — and none to the tilt. Every sensor's reported chromaticity moves by about seven ten-thousandths in u′v′ per per cent of tilt, every light nearly the same way.
Difference and uniformityA dark offset pulls every light toward one colour
An ambient sensor of seven narrow channels reads all fifty-one of a room's lights within a ΔEITP unit of a dim picture's tint through independent noise and a gain tilt, because its matrix barely cancels. A dark current is different again: it adds the same signal to every channel whatever the light, and at the dim end of a room's lighting it is a larger share of a weak channel than of a strong one. The prediction was that an offset of a quarter of a per cent of the strongest channel costs the seven-channel sensor lights, while three broad channels move least. Seven channels hold every light to two per cent. Three move furthest. And the offset does something simpler than either sensor's design suggests: it draws every light's reading straight toward the one colour the sensor reports for equal signals in every channel.
Difference and uniformityA light's distance from the equal-signal colour sets when it goes
An uncorrected dark offset draws every light an ambient sensor reads straight toward the one colour its matrix reports for equal signals in every channel, and a seven-channel sensor holds the room's fifty-one lights within a ΔEITP unit to an offset of two per cent of each light's strongest channel. The prediction was that the first light goes near three per cent and is the warmest, that each light's crossing offset falls with its distance from the equal-signal colour, and that two readings a light predict its crossing within a fifth. The warmest goes first — the 2,200 K radiator — but at 2.1 per cent. The twelve 2,700 K LEDs go together, between 3.9 and 4.4. Crossing follows distance at r = −0.93, and a straight line through each light's tints at one and two per cent predicts its crossing within 8 per cent, always early. Below half a per cent nothing moves at all.