the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

  • site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge
You are here: Home / The Last Word / Color space conversion errors with ProPhoto RGB — 8 bits

Color space conversion errors with ProPhoto RGB — 8 bits

October 7, 2014 By JimK Leave a Comment

ProPhoto RGB is not recommended as an 8-bit color space, but I thought I’d start there. I took all 16+ million colors in sRGB and converted them to PPRGB and back, quantizing to 8-bits per color plane after each conversion. The conversions themselves were performed algorithmically (no tables involved) with double precision floating point, and have errors on the order of 10^-14 CIELab DeltaE.  I looked at the CIELab DeltaE errors after each iteration, computed some stats, and watched how they changed.

s2pp2ssigmalab s2pp2swclab s2pp2smeanlab

The worst-case results are truly awful, but I was surprised by how little damage there was to the mean and standard deviation.

Here’s the original image:

RGB16Million

Here’s the error image after 50 iterations, normalized to worst-case equals full scale, and gamma-corrected with a gamma of 2.2:

8bitrtppdiff

Here’s the error image multiplied by 3 to show the smaller errors better:

8bitrtppdiffx3

Here’s a closeup of the upper left corner:

8bitrtppdiffulx3

And the lower tight corner:

8bitrtppdifflrx3

The patterns are pretty, but that’s about all I get out of the error images.

If we take all 16 million colors representable in 8-bit PPRGB to Lab and back over and over, quantizing to 8-bits after each conversion, we get these curves:

pp2lab2ppsogma pp2lab2ppwc pp2lab2ppmean

I’m a little surprised that the entire PPRGB gamut appears to lie within the Lab gamut. There are RGB triplets in PPRGB that don’t correspond to visible colors, and there are RGB triplets in Lab that don’t correspond to visible colors, but it’s surprising that all the PPRGB ones are representable in Lab. I did use a D65 spectrum sampled by the 2 degree standard observer for the Lab white point, if it make a difference.

 

 

 

 

← New show at Sunset Center Color space conversion errors with ProPhoto RGB — 15 bits →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

April 2021
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  
« Mar    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on Relative sensitivity of Sony a7RIV and GFX 100S
  • CarVac on Relative sensitivity of Sony a7RIV and GFX 100S
  • JimK on Relative sensitivity of Sony a7RIV and GFX 100S
  • Ilya Zakharevich on Pixel shift with the Fujifilm GFX 100S
  • Ilya Zakharevich on Relative sensitivity of Sony a7RIV and GFX 100S
  • JimK on GFX 100S sensor is a 4-shot stitch
  • John Leathwick on GFX 100S sensor is a 4-shot stitch
  • Christer Almqvist on GFX 100S sensor is a 4-shot stitch
  • JimK on Three dimensionality and sensor format
  • Tom Hegeman on Three dimensionality and sensor format

Archives

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.