Search

Abstract: Color‐appearance models, CIECAM02 and CAM16, usually include two one‐step chromatic adaptation transforms: a forward (one‐step) transform to convert data from a first illuminant to CIE illuminant E, plus a reverse (one‐step) transform to convert the results from CIE illuminant E to a second illuminant. In practice, however, one‐step chromatic adaptation models, that avoid the use of the intermediate CIE illuminant E, are also employed. Tests using the one‐step CAT16 model indicate failures of both the symmetry and transitivity properties, except in the case where the degree of adaptation D is equal to unity. The magnitude of these failures depends on the specific illuminants selected, and increases as the degree of adaptation decreases. From four possible two‐step CAT16 models, we have identified two that obey the symmetry and transitivity properties, one with slightly better predictions of the experimental corresponding‐color datasets available in the literature, and more consistent with the one‐step CAT16 model. The findings of this article confirm that, for incomplete adaptation, the use of the one‐step CAT is incorrect, and we propose that the use of a two‐step CAT16 model be mandatory for future applications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The CIECAM02 color-appearance model enjoys popularity in scientific research and industrial applications since it was recommended by the CIE in 2002. However, it has been found that computational failures can occur in certain cases such as during the image processing of cross-media color reproduction applications. Some proposals have been developed to repair the CIECAM02 model. However, all the proposals developed have the same structure as the original CIECAM02 model and solve the problems concerned at the expense of losing accuracy of predicted visual data compared with the original model. In this article, the structure of the CIECAM02 model is changed and the color and luminance adaptations to the illuminant are completed in the same space rather than in two different spaces, as in the original CIECAM02 model. It has been found that the new model (named CAM16) not only overcomes the previous problems, but also the performance in predicting the visual results is as good as if not better than that of the original CIECAM02 model. Furthermore the new CAM16 model is simpler than the original CIECAM02 model. In addition, if considering only chromatic adaptation, a new transformation, CAT16, is proposed to replace the previous CAT02 transformation. Finally, the new CAM16-UCS uniform color space is proposed to replace the previous CAM02-UCS space. A new complete solution for color-appearance prediction and color-difference evaluation can now be offered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Brill [Color Res Appl 2006;31:142-145] and Brill and Süsstrunk [Color Res Appl 2008;33:424-426] found that CIECAM02 has the yellow-blue and purple problems and gave partial solutions to them. In this article we model the optimum solution to the yellow-blue and purple problems simultaneously as a constrained non-linear optimization problem. An optimum solution resulting in a new CAT02 matrix is numerically obtained. This new matrix satisfies the nesting rule and performs better than the Hunt-Pointer-Estévez (HPE) matrix in predicting both corresponding colours and colour appearance data sets. Specifically, it was found that the new and HPE matrices performed significantly different on nine (out of 21) corresponding colour data sets and on all corresponding colours data sets as a whole. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Col Res Appl, 40, 491-503, 2015 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]