Dolores de Fez1, Maria José Luque, Maria Carmen García-Domene, Vicente Camps, David Piñero. 1. *PhD Dpto. Óptica, Farmacología y Anatomía, Universidad de Alicante, Alicante, Spain (DdF, VC, DP); Dpto. Óptica, Universidad de Valencia, Valencia, Spain (MJL); and Departamento de Calidad Visual, FISABIO-Oftalmología Médica, Valencia, Spain (MCG-D).
Abstract
PURPOSE: Available applications for vision testing in mobile devices usually do not include detailed setup instructions, sacrificing rigor to obtain portability and ease of use. In particular, colorimetric characterization processes are generally obviated. We show that different mobile devices differ also in colorimetric profile and that those differences limit the range of applications for which they are most adequate. METHODS: The color reproduction characteristics of four mobile devices, two smartphones (Samsung Galaxy S4, iPhone 4s) and two tablets (Samsung Galaxy Tab 3, iPad 4), have been evaluated using two procedures: 3D LUT (Look Up Table) and a linear model assuming primary constancy and independence of the channels. The color reproduction errors have been computed with the CIEDE2000 color difference formula. RESULTS: There is good constancy of primaries but large deviations of additivity. The 3D LUT characterization yields smaller reproduction errors and dispersions for the Tab 3 and iPhone 4 devices, but for the iPad 4 and S4, both models are equally good. The smallest reproduction errors occur with both Apple devices, although the iPad 4 has the highest number of outliers of all devices with both colorimetric characterizations. CONCLUSIONS: Even though there is good constancy of primaries, the large deviations of additivity exhibited by the devices and the larger reproduction errors make any characterization based on channel independence not recommendable. The smartphone screens show, in average, the best color reproduction performance, particularly the iPhone 4, and therefore, they are more adequate for applications requiring precise color reproduction.
PURPOSE: Available applications for vision testing in mobile devices usually do not include detailed setup instructions, sacrificing rigor to obtain portability and ease of use. In particular, colorimetric characterization processes are generally obviated. We show that different mobile devices differ also in colorimetric profile and that those differences limit the range of applications for which they are most adequate. METHODS: The color reproduction characteristics of four mobile devices, two smartphones (Samsung Galaxy S4, iPhone 4s) and two tablets (Samsung Galaxy Tab 3, iPad 4), have been evaluated using two procedures: 3D LUT (Look Up Table) and a linear model assuming primary constancy and independence of the channels. The color reproduction errors have been computed with the CIEDE2000 color difference formula. RESULTS: There is good constancy of primaries but large deviations of additivity. The 3D LUT characterization yields smaller reproduction errors and dispersions for the Tab 3 and iPhone 4 devices, but for the iPad 4 and S4, both models are equally good. The smallest reproduction errors occur with both Apple devices, although the iPad 4 has the highest number of outliers of all devices with both colorimetric characterizations. CONCLUSIONS: Even though there is good constancy of primaries, the large deviations of additivity exhibited by the devices and the larger reproduction errors make any characterization based on channel independence not recommendable. The smartphone screens show, in average, the best color reproduction performance, particularly the iPhone 4, and therefore, they are more adequate for applications requiring precise color reproduction.
Authors: Teresa Tang; Leticia Álvaro; James Alvarez; John Maule; Alice Skelton; Anna Franklin; Jenny Bosten Journal: Behav Res Methods Date: 2021-08-31