Talk:CIECAM02

L, M, S vs R, G, B
I wonder whether it’s a good idea to use the symbols L, M, S in describing colors in CAT02 and Hunt-Pointer-Estévez space, instead of R, G, and B. The latter seem to be pretty entrenched in the literature I see, including the draft of the CIECAM02 spec, the 6th edition of Hunt’s The Reproduction of Colour, and the second edition of Fairchilds Color Appearance Models. Additionally, using L for the long-wavelength cone response makes for easy confusion between Lw and LW, which would be seemingly much reduced if the former was called Rw instead. Cheers, jacobolus (t) 04:01, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I know why using R, G & B is potentially problematic, but in the relevant literature L is mostly used for luminance, like LA for the luminance of the adapting field, M for colourfulness, and s for saturation, so I kind of agree.

More sources
These slides provide a fairly good overview of CIECAM02: http://www.cis.rit.edu/fairchild/PDFs/AppearanceLec.pdf

And the equations are also listed in this paper: http://www.polybytes.com/misc/Meet_CIECAM02.pdf

86.125.224.249 (talk) 07:32, 30 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Definitely add good sources that aren’t already mentioned! A agree that Mark Fairchild’s lecture slides are great. Notice they’re linked at the bottom of the “references” section. I’ve also found that other paper useful in the past. Go ahead and put it into the article. –jacobolus (t) 19:47, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

spelling (American vs. British English)
I'm surprised that the spelling has been edited on this article from the British/Commonwealth predominant "colour" to the American predominant "color". The page has certainly started out using the "ou" form.

It's not a biggie, but I thought that Wikipedia etiquette discourages altering a page that way once it's started out with one flavour of spelling: https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_copy-edit#Correcting_spelling --XEmacs (talk) 00:30, 4 September 2015 (UTC)


 * The 'color' spelling was used since January 2008, by User:Adoniscik who wrote most of the page. I don’t think he was a seasoned Wikipedia author at the time, so he probably just didn’t know that convention. –jacobolus (t) 07:48, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on CIECAM02. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080515213555/http://www.polybytes.com/misc/Meet_CIECAM02.pdf to http://www.polybytes.com/misc/Meet_CIECAM02.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:00, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Reverse Transformation
Is there any reason there is only the forward transformation and not the reverse? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chilibat (talk • contribs) 23:07, 20 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Either my book did not have it or I got tired. I don't remember, but it makes no difference; feel free to add it. --Adoniscik(t, c) 17:33, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Link in reference 5 points to pornographic site
Discovered that the last link in reference 5 points to a pornographic site (polybytes.com). I don't know how to fix this, maybe someone can help to correct this link? Gerard (talk) 22:08, 15 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Fixed, thanks. --Adoniscik(t, c) 17:32, 21 June 2020 (UTC)