I have a coworker that is a member of one of CIE's divisions, so I asked him the LAB vs LUV question, and here's his reply:

"Yes, there is a simple historical explanation - LUV was championed by the display industry while LAB was the favorite of "surface" industries (print, materials manufacturing, ...). LUV has the beneficial property of having a saturation predictor and of being related to the luminance-linear u'v' chromaticity space. Let me know if you'd like more detail.

Today, I am not aware of LUV being used anywhere - LAB has won the battle between the two and is used even for displays. Either that, or, where higher performance is needed in terms of perceptual prediction accuracy, CIECAM02 (a color appearance model) is used. It is significantly more complex, but predicts more visual phenomena and allows for taking viewing conditions better into account.

So, I'd say use LAB if what it does is good enough and CIECAM02 if it fails (e.g., for gamut mapping LAB has serious hue non-uniformity)."

So, who's up for coding CIECAM02 color transformations, whatever that may be? ;-)

Jaime

-- 

(\__/)
( O.o)
( > <) Este es Conejo. Copia a Conejo en tu firma y ayúdale en sus planes de dominación mundial.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "scikit-image" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/scikit-image/DIRaSXJoEes/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all of its topics, send an email to scikit-image+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.