![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Illuminant D65 page were merged into Standard illuminant#Illuminant series D on February 15, 2024. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
I finally found it in amazon's search; the Schanda ref obviously just made an error in typesetting a table, as that's the only place where D65 is written with subscripted 65. So let's leave it out, OK? Dicklyon ( talk) 05:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
...but it's not the only place. In Chapter 2, page 17 you can find:
Perhaps, though, the CIE should have heeded Guild’s warning when the new daylight distribution D65 was defined in 1964 by its spectral power distribution. When samples which fluoresce have to be measured, we often need a laboratory source which simulates D65, but none is available which exactly reproduces its spectral distribution. It might have been better to have developed a source that simulated the D65 distribution closely enough for most practical purposes and to have adopted that source as the standard, with its energy distribution being given as a supplement to the definition.
Looking at other authors: " …CIE Standard Illuminant D65…, " The CIE D illuminants are properly denoted with a two-digit subscript."
-- Adoniscik( t, c) 15:14, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
It is written that «Normalizing for relative luminance, the XYZ tristimulus values are X=95.04, Y=100.00, Z=108.88». But, according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIE_1931_color_space , (x,y), given the brightness Y, are converted to XYZ as follows: X=Y/y*x, Z=Y/y*(1-x-y).
Using these formulas, we will get for Y=100.0:
X=100.0/32902*0.31271=95.04285...,
Y=100.0,
Z=100./0.32902*(1-0.31271-0.32902)=108.890037...
So, I think it is better to round Z as 108.89, not 108.88 as stated in article.
217.67.117.64 ( talk) 09:27, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Illuminant D65. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:23, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
I removed the edit by user @ Crissov where chromaticity coordinates were expressed as % values, in addition I also verified the chromaticity values using the XYZ values stated on the article. Chromaticity coordinates are not a scaler color space, there is no relative meaning between 0 and 1. While it is true that in the 2-degree chromaticity space, the values do add up to 1 this is not true for other chromaticity spaces. It's merely a small mathematical artifact from other design decisions for the 1931 std. obs. TDcolor ( talk) 17:10, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Illuminant D65 page were merged into Standard illuminant#Illuminant series D on February 15, 2024. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
I finally found it in amazon's search; the Schanda ref obviously just made an error in typesetting a table, as that's the only place where D65 is written with subscripted 65. So let's leave it out, OK? Dicklyon ( talk) 05:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
...but it's not the only place. In Chapter 2, page 17 you can find:
Perhaps, though, the CIE should have heeded Guild’s warning when the new daylight distribution D65 was defined in 1964 by its spectral power distribution. When samples which fluoresce have to be measured, we often need a laboratory source which simulates D65, but none is available which exactly reproduces its spectral distribution. It might have been better to have developed a source that simulated the D65 distribution closely enough for most practical purposes and to have adopted that source as the standard, with its energy distribution being given as a supplement to the definition.
Looking at other authors: " …CIE Standard Illuminant D65…, " The CIE D illuminants are properly denoted with a two-digit subscript."
-- Adoniscik( t, c) 15:14, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
It is written that «Normalizing for relative luminance, the XYZ tristimulus values are X=95.04, Y=100.00, Z=108.88». But, according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIE_1931_color_space , (x,y), given the brightness Y, are converted to XYZ as follows: X=Y/y*x, Z=Y/y*(1-x-y).
Using these formulas, we will get for Y=100.0:
X=100.0/32902*0.31271=95.04285...,
Y=100.0,
Z=100./0.32902*(1-0.31271-0.32902)=108.890037...
So, I think it is better to round Z as 108.89, not 108.88 as stated in article.
217.67.117.64 ( talk) 09:27, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Illuminant D65. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:23, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
I removed the edit by user @ Crissov where chromaticity coordinates were expressed as % values, in addition I also verified the chromaticity values using the XYZ values stated on the article. Chromaticity coordinates are not a scaler color space, there is no relative meaning between 0 and 1. While it is true that in the 2-degree chromaticity space, the values do add up to 1 this is not true for other chromaticity spaces. It's merely a small mathematical artifact from other design decisions for the 1931 std. obs. TDcolor ( talk) 17:10, 26 April 2023 (UTC)