What each fitted thing in these essays carries, what its data fix, and what is left
Drawn at its defaults, in how many measurements it takes. It takes 3 options, and the essays below show what each placement asks of it.
Called by 31 essays
the blast radius of changing it
An image does not determine the light
A photograph of a scene under one illuminant gives three numbers per surface and asks for the illuminant plus three numbers per surface. The count closes only if reflectances lie in a two-dimensional model, and no number of surfaces helps — at three dimensions the alternative scenes can be written down, and they reproduce every sensor response exactly.
What a camera doesThe chart decides the profile
A camera's colour matrix is nine numbers fitted to a set of patches somebody chose, and the number that comes with it is the error on those patches. On a chart with no chromatic range that number is 0.19 ΔE00 and the matrix delivers 1.65 — and a second matrix, indistinguishable on the chart, delivers 2.03.
What a camera doesA matrix is fitted under one light
A camera's colour matrix is nine numbers determined by a chart photographed under a particular illuminant, and the error it quotes is the error under that illuminant. Fitted under a tungsten lamp and used under a cold sky it delivers eight times as much — and the two-matrix scheme every real profile uses turns out not to be a compromise at all.
Where the model breaksA fit can be exact and empty
Every fitted object here reports one number, the residual on the data it was fitted to, and every one of them has two more that nobody publishes — how many of its parameters the data actually determine, and how large the family of equally good answers is. The third column is where the failures live.
Where the model breaksWhich 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.
What it takes to deliver itA profile is a fit between its nodes
A printer profile is a table, exact at every patch that was printed and interpolated everywhere else — and everywhere else is where every job lives. Going from a hundred and thirty-five patches to three and a half thousand is twenty-seven times the work for eight times the accuracy, and the exponents say that is as good as it gets.
What a camera doesTwo matrices do not reach a white LED
A camera profile's two matrices, blended by the scene's colour temperature, are as good as a matrix fitted anywhere along daylight. Under a white LED or a fluorescent tube the same blend leaves colours twice as far off as a matrix fitted under that lamp, and no weight inside the profile's range repairs it. What decides it is not how far the lamp sits from the Planckian locus — a triphosphor tube sits nearly on it and fares worst — but whether its spectrum has lines in it, which a white balance reading cannot see.
What a camera doesFlicker sorts lamps the wrong way
A camera cannot see a spectral line in its own white, so the essay on the two-matrix profile named the classifiers a device might have instead, and the first of them was flicker. Flicker is measurable, and it measures the wrong thing. It sorts lamps by how their power is delivered while the matrix needs them sorted by how their spectrum is shaped, and the two are independent: a white LED on a constant driver is perfectly steady and strongly structured, and it is what most indoor photographs are lit by.
What a camera doesTwo sensors disagree about deep red, not lines
A phone's ambient-light sensor and its camera read the same lamp differently, and the difference sorts fourteen lamps into smooth and structured without a single mistake — where flicker made five. It is not reading their lines. Almost all of it comes from the sensor's clear channel collecting deep red the camera's infrared cut throws away, so daylight with its far red trimmed is called structured and a white LED with a far-red emitter is called smooth.
What a camera doesA narrow channel has to be read on its own
An ambient sensor with a clear channel tells structured lamps from smooth ones by reading deep red, and one without it reads structure but breaks at one per cent of calibration error. A narrow fourth channel between the camera's peaks was proposed to have both. Pooled into the sensor's disagreement with the camera, it reads structure and breaks at one and a quarter per cent — no better than the design it was meant to rescue. Read on its own, as its departure from what the camera predicts for it, a channel at 450 nm holds to four per cent, the clear channel's figure, and far red does not move it.
What a camera doesThe lamps two channels miss are smooth to the camera
A narrow channel at 450 nm tells a phone which lamps are structured, and a white LED pumped in the violet might hide from it; a channel at 500 nm does the same job, and an LED with a cyan emitter should blind it. Reading both and calling a lamp structured if either departs was supposed to cover both families. It covers the cyan family only because the 450 nm channel already did, and half the violet-pumped LEDs escape both channels. Every one that escapes leaves the camera's colours as accurate as a smooth lamp does. What the classifier misses is what the camera does not need to be warned about.
What a camera doesTwo channels estimate what one can only sort
A narrow sensor channel was fitted to call lamps smooth or structured, and the label turned out to be a proxy for the thing a camera cares about: its own colour error under the lamp. Scored against that error directly, the best channel is still the one at 450 nm — the band where camera and observer differ most comes close and no closer. Read as an estimate rather than a verdict, a second channel at 500 nm, useless as a vote, earns its place: together they predict the camera's error to within 0.14 ΔE00 over fifty-four lamps, and deciding when to repair from that estimate raises a quarter of the false alarms the label raises.
What a camera doesA straightened channel repeats the one beside it
A phone's narrow sensor channel at 570 nm ranks a camera's colour error under a lamp almost as well as the one at 450, and estimates it worse than guessing the mean, because one lamp reads ten times higher than any other. Read through a logarithm, the channel is rescued: its estimate improves from ±0.57 to ±0.23. It still does not reach the 450 nm channel's ±0.16, and put beside that channel it adds nothing at all, where a 500 nm channel cuts the error to ±0.14. Straightened, 570 nm sorts the lamps as 450 nm already does; and the two lamps it reads highest have the most different errors, which no transform of one reading can tell apart.
What a camera doesOne ratio reads a peak and a trough
Two narrow sensor channels, at 450 and 500 nm, estimate a camera's colour error under a lamp to ±0.14 ΔE₀₀; the proposal was to read their ratio as one number instead. Taken as one channel's departure over the other's, the ratio is worthless — no better than the mean, because for smooth lamps both departures are nearly nothing. Taken as the departure of the two readings' ratio from what the camera predicts for it, one number estimates the error to ±0.141, as well as the two channels as two. The reason is a sign: under every structured lamp the channels depart in opposite directions, a peak at 450 and a trough at 500, and the ratio adds them; where a cyan fill lifts 500, it subtracts them, as the error falls. And no five per cent calibration error moves any of these estimates by a hundredth.
What a camera doesThe tube a third channel misses has no family
Two narrow sensor channels read as one ratio estimate a camera's colour error under fifty-four lamps to ±0.141 ΔE₀₀, and their worst miss is the halophosphate tube, whose trouble lies in its long-wave phosphor. A third narrow channel in the long-wave gap was predicted to halve that miss near 610 nm. No channel does, at any centre or width: the best buys under a tenth of the whole error and leaves the tube's miss above three quarters of what it was. At 610 nm the camera already predicts the tube's share almost exactly. The tube's error follows where its main phosphor band sits, and a 620 or 640 nm channel does read that — inside the tube's own family. The census has one halophosphate tube, and a lamp left out of a census that holds nothing like it is a lamp no channel can be fitted to.
What a camera doesTwo stages catch the tube and bill the lamps they misplace
A narrow-channel estimate of a camera's colour error missed the halophosphate tube because the census held nothing like it, and a line that learned the tube's family from four siblings cost every other lamp. The proposed cure was two stages: recognise a lamp's family, then apply that family's own line. Given each lamp's family, it works as predicted and better — the tube missed by 0.011 ΔE₀₀, the fifty-four lamps estimated to ±0.133 against the ratio's ±0.141. Found by the nearest other lamp in the sensor's departures, the family is right for the tube and wrong for five lamps, and those five, missed by ±0.41, take the whole census back to ±0.162. The gain is real; the classifier is where it is lost.
What a camera doesA classifier that abstains gives up the tube
Found by the nearest other lamp, a lamp's family cost a two-stage estimate of a camera's colour error more than it bought, because five lamps were placed confidently in the wrong family. The proposed repair was a classifier that abstains — falls back on the census-wide line — unless a lamp's three nearest neighbours agree. It abstains on the wrong lamps. The misplaced ones have three agreeing neighbours, all white LEDs; the lamp it gives up is the halophosphate tube the two stages were built to catch, whose third neighbour is a cyan LED, and its miss returns from 0.011 to 0.445. Two agreeing neighbours look better than knowing every family. Chosen without looking at the lamp being estimated, the rule is worth exactly what the ratio alone is worth.
What a camera doesA family's line runs through its neighbours
The halophosphate tubes differ from one another by one number — where their main phosphor band sits — and so lie along a line in the three departures an ambient-light sensor reads. The proposal was to classify a lamp by the family whose line passes nearest, which would keep the tube a vote of neighbours gives up. It keeps the tube, under every version that does not rescale the distances. It also places eighteen white LEDs on the radiators' line, because that line — fitted to six radiators close together — runs along the LEDs' own and, extended, straight through the violet-pumped ones; and the radiators' estimate, extrapolated to them, misses the triphosphor tube by 7.6. Clamped to the stretch each family spans, the lines still cost ±0.285; given to the halophosphate family alone, its line claims a cyan LED and costs ±0.179. The one line classifier that comes in under the ratio line's ±0.141 does so by two thousandths, having placed the tube with the LEDs.
What a camera doesRadiators and LEDs are one family to the sensor
An ambient-light sensor's three narrow departures see the collection's six smooth radiators and forty-four white LEDs along one line: the radiators' own short line lies on the LEDs' long one. Estimating a camera's colour error family by family, the census had treated them as two, and every classifier that tried to tell them apart paid for it. Merged into one family of smooth broadband sources, found by the nearest other lamp as before, the two-stage estimate comes to ±0.127 over fifty-four lamps held out — below the ratio line's ±0.141, and below the ±0.133 the separate families managed when every lamp's family was simply given. The halophosphate tube is still caught. The radiators, which the prediction said the merge would cost a little, are estimated better inside it than inside their own family, because a three-coefficient line fitted over five radiators was worse for them than the census-wide ratio line.
What a camera doesNew LEDs miss the line their cousins drew
An ambient-light sensor's three departures can estimate a camera's colour error under a lamp, and merging radiators and white LEDs into one smooth family brought that estimate to ±0.127 over fifty-four lamps, each left out in turn. Every one of those lamps had relatives in the pool. Fourteen lamps the census never saw test what the relatives were worth. The prediction was that new smooth lamps would land on the line and tinted incandescents fall off it by four tenths or more. The radiators and daylights land on it, within ±0.13 each. The tinted lamps do too — the pink-glass incandescent, placed among the LEDs by its nearest neighbour, misses by 0.12. The lamps that fall off are the new white LEDs: ±0.20, half again the census's error, two of them by a quarter. Their misses follow the sensor's 640 nm channel at a slope of −0.72, explaining four fifths of their scatter, because the line learned what that channel means from LEDs varied only in their blue pump. Adding the fourteen to the pool does not help.
What a camera doesLEDs varied in their phosphors fall off every line
The merged smooth family estimates a camera's colour error from an ambient-light sensor's departures to ±0.127, and five new white LEDs, varied in their phosphors where the census's forty-four vary their pump, missed by ±0.196 because the family's line had learned almost nothing about the sensor's 640 nm channel. Rebuilt on forty-eight LEDs varied in pump, converter and red phosphor, the line learns it: its 640 nm weight goes from −0.13 to −0.74, most of the way to the −0.85 the new LEDs implied. The prediction was that the new LEDs would then land within ±0.13. They miss by ±0.229, worse than before, crossing to the other side of the line, and the census's own held-out error more than doubles, to ±0.294. No pool of LEDs restores it, and no line in the sensor's departures reads the grid's own LEDs better than ±0.29. Across the grid the camera's error is a V about the Planckian locus, rising away from it on the green side and on the pink — and every one of the census's LEDs sat on the green side.
What a camera doesLEDs built on the locus still fall off the line
A camera's colour error under a lamp can be estimated from three narrow channels of a small sensor, read as departures from a smooth lamp of the same colour, and the estimate held for the census's white LEDs, which varied only their blue pump. Rebuilt on LEDs varied freely in pump, converter and red phosphor, it failed: the error was a V about the Planckian locus, and no line in the departures read it. A maker does not let the white fall where it falls, so the proposal was to build the LEDs as a maker does — the converter tuned for each pump and red phosphor until the white sits on the locus — and the prediction was that the V would go and the line return, the census's held-out error to within ±0.15. Thirty of thirty-six such LEDs can be built. On the locus the V is gone and the line is not: the LEDs alone are missed by ±0.25 to ±0.28, the census's lamps by ±0.27. Taken one pump at a time, the departures read the LEDs pumped at 452 nm to ±0.05 and those at 440 and 465 nm no better than ±0.17. Within one pump the LEDs are readable, and across pumps they are not.
What a camera doesA channel at each pump cannot see the recipe
Thirty white LEDs built onto the Planckian locus defeat a line in a small sensor's three departures, except within one pump: the 452 nm LEDs are read to ±0.047 by the 450 nm channel, the others no better than ±0.15. The proposal was a channel at each pump — 440 and 465 nm beside the 450 — and the prediction that each pump's LEDs would be read from their own channel within ±0.08. The 465 nm LEDs' own channel halves their miss, to ±0.135; the 440 nm LEDs' moves it from ±0.171 to ±0.149. No line in any three of the five departures reads either pump better than ±0.1. Yet the camera's error is simple: a line in what each LED is made of — its red phosphor, its colour temperature and their product — reads every pump within ±0.07, the 440 nm LEDs to ±0.043. The error is easy; the channels cannot see the recipe that sets it. Knowing each LED's pump halves the pooled miss, to ±0.119, and two blue channels can tell only one pump of three from the others.
What a camera doesThe converter gives the red phosphor away
A camera's error under white LEDs built onto the Planckian locus is simple in what each LED is made of — its red phosphor and its colour temperature — and a small sensor's narrow departures cannot read the red phosphor. The proposal was a channel at 610 nm, where a garnet converter falls and a red phosphor rises, and the prediction that it reads the red-phosphor strength within a tenth of its range. Within a pump it reads nothing: ±0.36 to ±0.43 at 440 and 452 nm against a spread of ±0.36, and no red channel from 600 to 680 nm does better than ±0.22. The reason is the locus. To keep the white's colour, each step of red phosphor pushes the converter's peak shorter, by 29 to 55 nanometres from none to the most, and in every red channel the two changes cancel. What survives is the converter: the 600 nm departure reads its peak to ±5 nm. Read across all thirty LEDs at once, the converter gives the red phosphor away — ±0.12 — and the error read through that estimated recipe comes within ±0.08 at every pump, the 440 nm LEDs at ±0.078, half their own channel's miss.
What a camera doesBeside the locus the converter still gives the red away
On the Planckian locus, a white LED's red phosphor pushes its converter to a shorter peak, so an ambient sensor's 600 nm departure, which reads the converter, reads the red phosphor too — within ±0.12 of a spread of ±0.36 — and through it the camera's colour error within ±0.074 ΔE₀₀. Real LEDs are binned a few thousandths off the locus, and the prediction was that a Duv of 0.003 moves the converter about as far as a fifth of the red phosphor does, so that the line learned on the locus misreads off-locus LEDs by a fifth of the range and their error falls back to ±0.12. The converter moves under two nanometres. The line reads the off-locus LEDs' red within ±0.11 and ±0.12, as well as it reads the locus's own held out — with a bias of about a twentieth that follows the Duv's sign. The error reads a third to a half worse, ±0.096 and ±0.107, and most of that is the camera's error itself moving off the locus with nothing in the recipe changed.
What a camera doesAcross a bin, the camera's error bends with the temperature
White LEDs a Duv of 0.003 off the Planckian locus have their red phosphor read by an ambient sensor as well as LEDs on it, and their camera colour error read a third to a half worse, because the error itself moves with the Duv. The prediction was that one Duv term in the error's line, learned over all eighty-nine LEDs, brings those beside the locus back to the locus's ±0.074 ΔE₀₀ and costs the locus LEDs nothing. One term buys little: ±0.109 below the locus and ±0.085 above. The error turns across the locus one way at 2,700 K and the other at 4,000 and 6,500 K, and bends most where it is warmest, so the Duv has to enter as a slope and a curve for each temperature — ten numbers a pump, not five — before both sides come back, to ±0.056 and ±0.048. That line then reads the locus LEDs at ±0.073, worse than the ±0.062 a line with no Duv in it manages once it is learned across the bin.
What a camera doesThe bin's curve holds between its points and breaks beyond them
A camera's colour error under a white LED was read from an ambient sensor across a manufacturing bin by a line with a slope and a curve in Duv for each colour temperature, fitted at three Duv values — on the locus and 0.003 either side — and reading the LEDs beside the locus within ±0.056 and ±0.048 ΔE₀₀. A curve through three points passes through them whatever happens between them. The prediction was that 119 new LEDs built at ±0.0015 are read within ±0.06, and those at ±0.006 worse than ±0.10. Both halves hold: ±0.045 and ±0.043 inside, ±0.153 and ±0.161 outside. But the error's own mean course stays on its parabola within 0.02 out to ±0.006. The line's bend is not the error's: it is the gap the line leaves between the locus LEDs and the bin's edges, and a gap spent as a curvature quadruples at twice the distance.
What a camera doesA level for each temperature lets the curve be the error's
An error line with a slope and a curve in Duv for each colour temperature read white LEDs inside a manufacturing bin within ±0.045 ΔE₀₀ and LEDs at twice the bin's edge only within ±0.16, though the camera's own error stays on its parabola there. Its curve was borrowed: the line's shared terms could not place each temperature's level, and the square of the Duv absorbed the gap. The prediction was that one more number a pump, the square of the mireds, brings the locus LEDs within ±0.05 and those at ±0.006 within ±0.08. It brings the locus to ±0.025 — three times better than the locus-only line that started this run of essays — and the outer LEDs to ±0.049 and ±0.058. The curvature the line now implies at each temperature is the error's own within a fifth; what it leaves is the warm whites' scatter at the bin's edges.
What a camera doesThe red phosphor tilts the warm whites and bends nothing
An error line with a level, a slope and a curve in Duv for each colour temperature reads white LEDs at 4,000 and 6,500 K within ±0.04 ΔE₀₀ across and beyond a manufacturing bin, but warm whites at twice the bin's edge only within ±0.087. The prediction was that the red phosphor sets a warm white's bend, so that one term more a pump — the square of the Duv times the estimated red — brings them within ±0.05. It moves them by a thousandth. The red phosphor enters the slope instead: the Duv times the red takes them to ±0.046 below the locus and ±0.067 above. And the rest points upstream. The first stage reads a warm white's red phosphor squeezed toward the middle of its range, the warm misses follow that misreading times the Duv at r = 0.79, and given the red each LED was built with the warm whites come within ±0.05 — though the same substitution doubles the error at 4,000 K.
What a camera doesThe line had already undone the squeeze
An ambient sensor's first stage reads a 2,700 K white LED's red phosphor squeezed about a third toward the middle of its range, and the camera-error line's warm misses outside the bin follow that misreading times the Duv. The prediction was that giving the first stage the Duv times its 600 nm departure and times the mireds would undo the squeeze. It changes nothing: the squeeze belongs to the temperature, and a level and a departure slope for each temperature read the warm red four times better, within ±0.035. But the eleven-term error line does not move — no warm LED by more than 0.006 — because at one temperature a squeeze is a rescaling its red and red-times-mireds terms had already undone. Only the red-slope line, whose one coefficient a pump spans three temperatures, gains: to ±0.034 below the locus, within 0.002 of the red known. And the cold whites pay for it.
What a camera doesTwo estimates of one red each read their own end
Two first stages read a white LED's red phosphor from an ambient sensor: one squeezes the warm whites' red a third toward the middle, the other reads it four times better, and a camera-error line with a red slope prefers the first for cold whites and the second for warm. The prediction was that a line handed both — the eleven-term line on the squeezed estimate, the red slope on the faithful one — keeps each end's gain. It does, within 0.004 at the cold end. But the second estimate is not needed: the squeezed red alone, its red slope multiplied by the mireds, reads every LED within a ten-thousandth of the split line. And the two estimates' difference is worth a term of its own. Added to the line, it reads the cold whites within ±0.016 at every Duv and on the locus within a thousandth, and moves the warm whites and the middle by nothing.