Re: Colorimetric Accuracy In the Field
Re: Colorimetric Accuracy In the Field
- Subject: Re: Colorimetric Accuracy In the Field
- From: edmund ronald <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2013 13:14:03 +0200
It would seem that creating a camera with 3 accurate cone sensitivities, or
even 4, is a solvable technical issue.
But how can one recreate the observer's white point adoption, especially in
the presence of mixed light, if one does not register the 360 degree scene
at high DR?
Edmund
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 2:45 AM, Graeme Gill <email@hidden> wrote:
> Jeffrey Stevensen wrote:
> > If you meter the sunlight, what happens to your accuracy as more or less
> of
> > these lights mix in different parts of the scene? It's my experience
> that color
> > temperature will vary over as little as a couple feet or even the angle
> of the metering
> > instrument to the light sources, or the angle of the target to the main
> light (the sun)
> > and the mix of other reflections, or the color of a wall or pavement or
> greenery and
> > trees.
>
> Right, but this doesn't really matter - in the end it's what the human
> observer
> would use as their white point that counts. The illuminant color
> temperature
> is just a starting point to guess/estimate what that is.
>
> > It seems to me that the colorimetric accuracy would come down to only a
> very
> > specific white balance in one tiny part of a scene.
>
> Colorimetric accuracy is independent of white point - ie. XYZ is absolute,
> not white point relative. XYZ is the light levels integrated with certain
> spectral sensitivities - the ones typical of a human observer. The way
> these
> three levels are balanced (gain adjusted) in the eye and nervous system
> is what sets the observer white point.
>
> White point is something of interest after you've captured the
> colorimetery,
> when you want to re-interpret a colorimetric image for a media/on a device
> which will cause the human observer to be adapted to a different white
> point
> than they would be in the original scene.
>
> > One would have to completely
> > control and dominate the lighting with controlled lighting in order to
> have any
> > predicted knowledge of the accuracy of a rendered color.
>
> Not so if you have a colorimetric capture device.
>
> > And as Andrew has pointed out
> > you would have to measure every color everywhere so as to have two
> "patches" to
> > actually compare, an impossibility.
>
> Not so, if you use a camera which is colorimetrically accurate. Using spot
> measurements of real world objects under real world illumination is just a
> way
> of confirming that your colorimetric camera is operating accurately.
>
> There are two complementary ways in which a colorimetrically accurate
> camera can be approached: 1) change it's spectral sensitivities to better
> match
> the human observer 2) Come up with ways of compensating (ie. calibrating)
> for the
> interaction of illuminant, object reflectance spectra and the
> non-colorimetric
> camera sensitivities. The latter can never be a perfect way of repairing
> the
> first defect, and has various degrees of practical difficulty.
>
> Graeme Gill.
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>
>
> This email sent to email@hidden
>
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden