Lars Schropp1. 1. Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, University of Aarhus, Denmark. lschropp@odont.au.dk
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of digital photographs and graphic computer software for color matching compared to conventional visual matching. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The shade of a tab from a shade guide (Vita 3D-Master Guide) placed in a phantom head was matched to a second guide of the same type by nine observers. This was done for twelve selected shade tabs (tests). The shade-matching procedure was performed visually in a simulated clinic environment and with digital photographs, and the time spent for both procedures was recorded. An alternative arrangement of the shade tabs was used in the digital photographs. In addition, a graphic software program was used for color analysis. Hue, chroma, and lightness values of the test tab and all tabs of the second guide were derived from the digital photographs. According to the CIE L*C*h* color system, the color differences between the test tab and tabs of the second guide were calculated. The shade guide tab that deviated least from the test tab was determined to be the match. Shade matching performance by means of graphic software was compared with the two visual methods and tested by Chi-square tests (alpha= 0.05). RESULTS: Eight of twelve test tabs (67%) were matched correctly by the computer software method. This was significantly better (p < 0.02) than the performance of the visual shade matching methods conducted in the simulated clinic (32% correct match) and with photographs (28% correct match). No correlation between time consumption for the visual shade matching methods and frequency of correct match was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Shade matching assisted by digital photographs and computer software was significantly more reliable than by conventional visual methods.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of digital photographs and graphic computer software for color matching compared to conventional visual matching. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The shade of a tab from a shade guide (Vita 3D-Master Guide) placed in a phantom head was matched to a second guide of the same type by nine observers. This was done for twelve selected shade tabs (tests). The shade-matching procedure was performed visually in a simulated clinic environment and with digital photographs, and the time spent for both procedures was recorded. An alternative arrangement of the shade tabs was used in the digital photographs. In addition, a graphic software program was used for color analysis. Hue, chroma, and lightness values of the test tab and all tabs of the second guide were derived from the digital photographs. According to the CIE L*C*h* color system, the color differences between the test tab and tabs of the second guide were calculated. The shade guide tab that deviated least from the test tab was determined to be the match. Shade matching performance by means of graphic software was compared with the two visual methods and tested by Chi-square tests (alpha= 0.05). RESULTS: Eight of twelve test tabs (67%) were matched correctly by the computer software method. This was significantly better (p < 0.02) than the performance of the visual shade matching methods conducted in the simulated clinic (32% correct match) and with photographs (28% correct match). No correlation between time consumption for the visual shade matching methods and frequency of correct match was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Shade matching assisted by digital photographs and computer software was significantly more reliable than by conventional visual methods.