4 ms·

In my brief dive into colorspaces I got the impression that CIELAB isn't actually that uniform and there are better spaces available, such as DIN99o (actually D

by heftig 7y ago

In my brief dive into colorspaces I got the impression that CIELAB isn't actually that uniform and there are better spaces available, such as DIN99o (actually DIN 6176). Is this right?

raphlinus 7y ago
CIELab is not perfect, but is probably Good Enough, especially for the kinds of use cases as described in this article. One of its main flaws is lack of hue constancy, particularly in blue. There are any number of colorspaces that have been proposed that are better. Some are complex and ad hoc, such as two different releases of CIECAM. Others are relatively simple, such as Jzazbz. IPT also comes up a lot. I think the issue is that there isn't anything resembling consensus on which of these "more perceptually uniform" color spaces we should use. So a bunch of efforts, including freieFarbe, use Lab.
- darylkoop 7y ago
  Precisely this—while we only mention CIELAB in the post, we also tested other perceptually uniform color spaces in addition to Lab (and can switch between them in the color tool). In particular, we also tested CIECAM02 extensively. We found that both were sufficient for the level of precision we needed and that Lab’s simpler lightness calculations are more closely aligned with how WCAG contrast ratios are calculated. We’re definitely open to testing other color spaces in the future as we continue to refine our color palettes.
  - jacobolus 7y ago
    If you want something reasonably simple and fast to compute but which has been optimized to fit available experimental data better than CIELAB you could try https://observablehq.com/@jrus/jzazbz https://observablehq.com/@jrus/jzazbz
    - notzuck 7y ago
      You're not smart.
      - jacobolus 7y ago
        What?
        notzuck 7y ago
        Exactly what I said. You're just not smart. You're not really worth my time and I have nothing but contempt for the way you think.
        jacobolus 7y ago
        Why do you feel the need to express this sentiment in a completely unrelated public discussion? (Are you an expert on human color vision or color reproduction technology or something?) Why should anyone reading this care whether you think I’m smart or not? Why should I care? I guess I should feel flattered to have earned your contempt. (Is your contempt a rare prize? Or do you feel contempt easily?) Sorry for all the questions, but this is a quite strange and amusing experience for me.
        dang 7y ago
        Yikes. Posting like you did in this thread is a bannable offence on HN. I'm going to assume you didn't know you were breaking the site guidelines, but would you mind reviewing them and taking the spirit of this site to heart? Note the most important rule for comments: "Be kind." It doesn't vary based on how wrong (or how smart) the other person is. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

by heftig 7y ago

In my brief dive into colorspaces I got the impression that CIELAB isn't actually that uniform and there are better spaces available, such as DIN99o (actually DIN 6176). Is this right?

raphlinus 7y ago

CIELab is not perfect, but is probably Good Enough, especially for the kinds of use cases as described in this article. One of its main flaws is lack of hue constancy, particularly in blue. There are any number of colorspaces that have been proposed that are better. Some are complex and ad hoc, such as two different releases of CIECAM. Others are relatively simple, such as Jzazbz. IPT also comes up a lot. I think the issue is that there isn't anything resembling consensus on which of these "more perceptually uniform" color spaces we should use. So a bunch of efforts, including freieFarbe, use Lab.

darylkoop 7y ago
Precisely this—while we only mention CIELAB in the post, we also tested other perceptually uniform color spaces in addition to Lab (and can switch between them in the color tool). In particular, we also tested CIECAM02 extensively. We found that both were sufficient for the level of precision we needed and that Lab’s simpler lightness calculations are more closely aligned with how WCAG contrast ratios are calculated. We’re definitely open to testing other color spaces in the future as we continue to refine our color palettes.
- jacobolus 7y ago
  If you want something reasonably simple and fast to compute but which has been optimized to fit available experimental data better than CIELAB you could try https://observablehq.com/@jrus/jzazbz https://observablehq.com/@jrus/jzazbz
  - notzuck 7y ago
    You're not smart.
    - jacobolus 7y ago
      What?
      - notzuck 7y ago
        Exactly what I said. You're just not smart. You're not really worth my time and I have nothing but contempt for the way you think.
        jacobolus 7y ago
        Why do you feel the need to express this sentiment in a completely unrelated public discussion? (Are you an expert on human color vision or color reproduction technology or something?) Why should anyone reading this care whether you think I’m smart or not? Why should I care? I guess I should feel flattered to have earned your contempt. (Is your contempt a rare prize? Or do you feel contempt easily?) Sorry for all the questions, but this is a quite strange and amusing experience for me.
        dang 7y ago
        Yikes. Posting like you did in this thread is a bannable offence on HN. I'm going to assume you didn't know you were breaking the site guidelines, but would you mind reviewing them and taking the spirit of this site to heart? Note the most important rule for comments: "Be kind." It doesn't vary based on how wrong (or how smart) the other person is. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html