A Comparison of Two Different Light Booths for Measuring Color Difference of Metameric Pairs

Result code in IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F46747885%3A24410%2F21%3A00009425" target="_blank" >RIV/46747885:24410/21:00009425 - isvavai.cz</a>

Result on the web

<a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2673-7248/1/3/30" target="_blank" >https://www.mdpi.com/2673-7248/1/3/30</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/textiles1030030" target="_blank" >10.3390/textiles1030030</a>

Result language

angličtina

Original language name

A Comparison of Two Different Light Booths for Measuring Color Difference of Metameric Pairs

Original language description

A standardized source of light is essential for visual color assessments, which is why lighting booths were developed. For the best results in visual assessment, it is important to consider the right choice of light source, the right viewing conditions, and the variability of the viewer. To date, many light booth technologies have been introduced to meet user demands. Since most of the light sources on the market are characterized by the designer or manufacturer, the resulting variations from booth-to-booth remain. In this study, we compared the performance of two standard light booths to assess the color difference of eleven metameric pairs. In this study, we checked an earlier technology-based light booth that is still used in the textile industry and contains illuminant A (Tungsten lamp) with CCT 2700 K, TL84 (tri-band fluorescent tube) with CCT 4000 K, and simulator D65 (CCT 6500 K) with a different light booth whose original light sources have been replaced by currently available LED retro kits from equivalent CCTs. As an inexperienced customer or industrial user, our question was, how important is this replacement? The results revealed that two different standard lighting technologies with similar CCTs cannot reproduce the same estimates because the light sources produced different SPDs. It is illustrating that caution is necessary when comparing results obtained from two different light booths containing light sources with similar CCTs but different SPDs. This comparative study suggested that the variability of the light sources’ SPDs or the observer or the sample should be modeled considering light booth’s technology to estimate its contribution to the overall variability. The close relationship between perceived and CAM02-UCS suggests that if both booths are used after the light sources have been calibrated, a formula based on color appearance models must be used to predict color appearance. To obtain better agreement between perceived and calculated color difference, one must need to avoid light booths with nominally white light sources.

Czech name

—

Czech description

—

Type

J_SC - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the SCOPUS database

CEP classification

—

OECD FORD branch

20201 - Electrical and electronic engineering

Project

—

Continuities

S - Specificky vyzkum na vysokych skolach

Publication year

2021

Confidentiality

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Name of the periodical

Textiles

ISSN

2673-7248

e-ISSN

—

Volume of the periodical

1

Issue of the periodical within the volume

3

Country of publishing house

CH - SWITZERLAND

Number of pages

13

Pages from-to

558-570

UT code for WoS article

—

EID of the result in the Scopus database

2-s2.0-85134717450