Observer metamerism in commercial displays

Xie, Hao; Farnand, Susan; Murdoch, Michael J.

doi:10.1364/josaa.382228

Cited by 26 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, changing the primary set was also found to cause observer metamerism, a phenomenon that the color appearance of a pair of color stimuli composed of two primary sets appear to match to one observer, but mismatch to other observers. It was found that the degrees of observer metamerism (i.e., the variations of color differences perceived by different observers) varied with the primary sets [15][16][17][18][19][20][21].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Observer metamerism to display white point using different primary sets

Hu¹,

Mao²,

Luo³

2020

Opt. Express

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Displays with different primary sets were found to introduce perceived color mismatch between stimuli that are computationally metameric and to affect the variations of the perceived color difference of metameric stimuli among observers (i.e., observer metamerism). In this study, computational analyses and psychophysical experiments were carried out to investigate the possibilities of increasing the color gamut area of a commercially available liquid crystal display (LCD) system using 16 three-primary sets, so that the perceived color difference of the white point between the system and the reference display and observer metamerism can be minimized. It was found the primary set with the peak wavelengths of 450, 525, and 665 nm was able to increase the sRGB color gamut by 72.1% in the CIE 1931 chromaticity diagram, which was found to have a strong correlation to the color volume of wide color gamut displays, while introducing the minimal color mismatch to the white point of the reference display and observer metamerism. The small white point color mismatch could be due to the similar wavelengths of the blue and green primaries in comparison to the reference display. In addition, the experiment results suggested that the CIE 2006 2°Color Matching Functions (CMFs) had better performance in characterizing the color match of the white point than the CIE 1931 2°, 1964 10°, and 2006 10°CMFs, which could be due to the fact that the stimulus used in the experiment only had a field of view (FOV) around 3.8°.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Observer metamerism to display white point using different primary sets

Hu¹,

Mao²,

Luo³

2020

Opt. Express

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several possible metrics, which have been examined in previous works 13,33 as a metamerism index or metric, were considered: goodness‐of‐fit coefficient (GFC), 34 spectral correlation angle (SCA), and spectral angle mapper (SAM) 35 . These metrics are commonly based on comparing spectral similarity between spectral curves.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In order to verify the performance of the four metrics (SAM, SCA, GFC, and OMM N ), the OMM indices of the 28 example display pairs with a peak luminance of 1000 cd/m 2 and outputs of the metrics were compared. Additionally, the SPDs of seven commercial displays from Xie's work 13 were included to use for evaluation in the same manner. It should be noted that the seven commercial displays resulted in 21 display pairs.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The experimental result also confirmed that the degree of OM between the two displays is apparent due to the spectral discrepancy and inter‐observer variability. While these works merely evaluated OM between a pair of displays, Xie et al 13 . evaluated OM across seven commercial displays, which mostly cover the extent of the DCI.P3 color gamut, using 1000 individual colorimetric observers generated based on Asano's work 14 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Efficiently evaluating the effect of color gamut and spectral bandwidth on observer metamerism in high dynamic range displays

Park

Murdoch

2021

J Soc Info Display

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Observer metamerism (OM), which likely causes potential issues in high dynamic range (HDR) displays due to those formidable peak luminance and color gamut required, is examined in this work using simulations. The simulations focus on investigating how OM in HDR displays would vary with chromaticity gamut and peak luminance level changes, proposing a new OM index, OMM. The effects of additional factors noteworthy on OM, such as reference white level, age, and spectral characteristics, are discussed. Finally, a simple metric capable of predicting observer metamerism between displays with less computational complexity, OMMN, is introduced. The simulation results showed that observer metamerism magnitudes between displays tend to depend on the similarity in spectral bandwidth between paired displays, in addition to the fact that narrow‐band primary displays generally cause larger metameric failures. Besides, the effect of changes in peak luminance on observer metamerism was found to be relatively small, increasing OMM by 7%–8% when peak luminance doubles. Notably, the proposed efficient metric OMMN outperforms metrics based on spectral similarity by also factoring in inter‐observer variability. In addition, the proposed metric's performance with 10 categorical observers, OMMN, 10, is nearly as good as that with thousands more computations. OMMN, 10 is recommended as a reliable and efficient metric to evaluate OM between HDR displays.

show abstract

“…With the development of modern color science and technology, there are more techniques and methods to reproduce colors, such as light-emitting diodes (LEDs) and lasers that are spectrally narrow band, magnifying the individual differences in color-matching functions (CMFs). In that case, the observers with normal color vision will have different color perceptions (named color inconstancy) [1] and different color differences (named observer metamerism) [2], [3] under the same viewing conditions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%