ArticleColor research and application2021
Color appearance model incorporating contrast adaptation - implications for individual differences in color vision.
Article in Color research and application, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Designing for sensory adaptation: what you see depends on what you've been looking at - Recommendations, guidelines and standards should reflect this.Policy insights from the behavioral and brain sciences · 2024Article
- Color difference between the vita classical shade guide and composite veneers using the dual-layer technique.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2022Article
- Using Smooth Metamers to Estimate Color Appearance Metrics for Diverse Color-Normal Observers.Color research and application · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Color appearance models use standard color matching functions to derive colorimetric information from spectral radiometric measurements of a visual environment, and they process that information to predict color perceptual attributes such as hue, chroma and lightness. That processing is usually done by equations with fixed numerical coefficients that were predetermined to yield optimal agreement for a given standard observer. Here we address the well-known fact that, among color-normal observers, there are significant differences of color matching functions. These cause disagreements between individuals as to whether certain colors match, an important effect that is often called observer metamerism. Yet how these individual sensitivity differences translate into differences in perceptual metrics is not fully addressed by many appearance models. It might seem that appearance could be predicted by substituting an individual's color matching functions into an otherwise-unchanged color appearance model, but this is problematic because the model's coefficients were not optimized for the new observer. Here we explore a solution guided by the idea that processes of adaptation in the visual system tend to compensate color perception for differences in cone responses and consequent color matching functions. For this purpose, we developed a simple color appearance model that uses only a few numerical coefficients, yet accurately predicts the perceptual attributes of Munsell samples under a selected standard lighting condition. We then added a feedback loop to automatically adjust the model coefficients, in response to switching between cone fundamentals simulating different observers and color matching functions. This adjustment is intended to model long term contrast adaptation in the vision system by maintaining average overall color contrast levels. Incorporating this adaptation principle into color appearance models could allow better assessments of displays and illumination systems, to help improve color appearances for most observers.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.