RESUMO
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: How the color parameters obtained from digital photographs may be influenced by illumination, file format, and subject color is unclear. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate color differences (ΔE00) and CIELab color coordinates among different types of file formats of dental shade tab images with and without white balance. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Different shade tab colors (n=10) were photographed with a digital camera under standard conditions. The photographs were stored in RAW, JPEG, and TIFF file formats and evaluated with and without white balance (WB) adjustment by using an image software program and a gray reference card with known color coordinates. CIEDE2000 color differences between each image file format and the control group (RAW WB) were calculated, and interpreted by the visual perceptibility (PT00=0.8) and acceptability (AT00=1.8) thresholds. The ΔE00 color shift was defined according to CIEDE2000 lightness, chroma, and hue and interpreted by the following respective visual acceptability thresholds: 2.92, 2.52, and 1.90. The differences among the color coordinates were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Bonferroni post hoc tests (α=.05). RESULTS: The color coordinates presented statistically significant differences between the file formats and control group (P<.001). Excellent matches (ΔE00 ≤0.8) were observed on TIFF and JPEG saved from RAW-WB. Images without WB presented unacceptable mismatches (ΔE00 >5.4). ΔE00 color shift of images without WB were predominantly influenced by ΔH00, while JPEG, WB, and TIFF WB were mostly influenced by ΔC00. CONCLUSIONS: Only compressed JPEG or TIFF files of dental shade tabs derived from original RAW WB photographs were able to achieve color differences within the limits of the 50:50% perceptibility threshold, providing excellent color matches with the RAW WB files.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate color, lightness, chroma, hue, and translucency adjustment potential of resin composites using CIEDE2000 color difference formula. METHODS: Three resin composites (Filtek Universal, Harmonize, and Omnichroma) were tested. Two types of specimens were prepared: an outer base shade with an inner hole filled with test shades and single-composite specimens of all shades. Spectrorradiometric reflectances measurements and subsequent CIELAB color coordinates and translucency parameter (TP) were performed. Color (CAP00 ), lightness, chroma, hue, and translucency (TAP00 ) adjustment potential using CIEDE2000 color difference were computed. Color and transparency differences among composite materials and shades were statistically tested (P < 0.05). RESULTS: Positive CAP00 and TAP00 values were found for majority of tested materials. CAP00 values ranged from -0.14 to 0.89, with the highest values found for Omnichroma (>0.75 in all cases). TAP00 values ranged from -0.06 to 0.86 with significant translucency differences among dual and single specimens. Omnichroma exhibited the highest adjustment potential for all color dimensions studied. CONCLUSIONS: Lightness, hue, chroma, and translucency adjustment potential have been introduced using CIEDE2000 color difference formula, and have shown their usefulness to evaluate blending effect in dentistry. Color coordinates and translucency adjustment potential were dependent on dental material. Omnichroma exhibited the most pronounced blending effect. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Resin composites with increased color and translucency adjustment may simplify shade selection, making this process easier and less time consuming. Furthermore, these materials might facilitate challenging and complex color matching situations.