journal of dentistry 37s (2009) e2–e6

available at www.sciencedirect.com

journal homepage: www.intl.elsevierhealth.com/journals/jden

Review

Color measurement in dentistry

William M. Johnston *
Division of Restorative and Prosthetic Dentistry, The Ohio State University College of Dentistry,
305 W. 12th Ave., Columbus, OH 43210-1267, United States

article info abstract

Article history: Measurements of the color of natural and restorative craniofacial and dental materials have
Received 2 March 2009 many important applications to clinical practice and research. Although the specification of
Accepted 13 March 2009 color at the level of the human observer involves only three dimensions or a color difference
between two colors, a more technical viewpoint of color determination involves the visible
spectrum. This review will provide the link between the spectral, the three-dimensional and
Keywords: the color difference aspects of color and emphasize important geometrical aspects of all
Color parameters measuring systems. Further, evaluations of accuracy and precision of measuring systems
Spectral characteristics and considerations of acceptability and perceptibility of a color difference are reviewed, and
Color difference applications of color measurements to important appearance characteristics of natural and
Accuracy restorative materials are briefly introduced.
Repeatability # 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Perceptability limit
Acceptability limit
Translucency
Absortion
Scattering
Illumination and viewing
geometries

1. Introduction information could be used to facilitate the color formulation of

the restoration such that the restoration could be made to
A common ultimate goal of color measurement or shade have identical colors under various illumination conditions,
specification in dentistry is the reproduction by prosthetic within at least acceptable limits but more preferably within
materials of an important appearance characteristic of natural limits of perceived color difference.
oral structures. Within the clinical setting when an indirect Color measurements in dentistry often involve non-
restoration is planned for an area of the face which is readily homogeneous layers of both natural1 and prosthetic2 materi-
observed and the restoration would be easily assessed for als with varying inherent color and translucency. In the clinic,
harmony to adjacent existing natural structure, it would be these materials often present with an external curved surface.
ideal to quantify valid color information quickly and reliably By contrast, color and reflectance standards are flat and
using the patient’s existing natural structure which has opaque, mainly due to the complicating effects of both
characteristics throughout the visible spectrum. Then this translucency and non-planar surfaces on color measurement.

* Tel.: +1 614 292 0955; fax: +1 614 292 9422.

E-mail address: [email protected].
0300-5712/$ – see front matter # 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2009.03.011
 journal of dentistry 37s (2009) e2–e6 e3

Hence the specification of the color of oral structures has photometric measures to various color measures. Principal
traditionally been the subject of much evaluation. Originally component analysis has been well reviewed for applications in
tooth color received much attention,3 but facial skin and color technology by Tzeng and Berns.12 The ability to convert a
gingival colors4,5 have also been described as important to the reflectance or transmittance spectra to multiple colorimetric
esthetics of prostheses. Also, since the colors of oral structures data is facilitated by the available publication of much
are most commonly observed in reflection, this review will illumination and the two major observer characteristics.10,11
concentrate on this mode of observation. Computer programs are often supplied with spectrophoto-
metric measuring devices to facilitate the conversion of
reflectance to the various color parameters. Also, spectral
2. Spectrophotometric and colorimetric optical absorption and scattering characteristics were
measurements described for both natural1,13 and restorative2,14 materials
and provide a mechanism for applying optical measurements
Color perception by human observers involves the spectrum made for varying material thickness or backing conditions or
of visible light entering the eye and stimulating the three types both to the optical properties of standardized conditions.15
of color receptors in the eye’s retina, which in turn commu- The conversion of spectrophotometric measures to color
nicate to the brain via the optic nerve.6,7 Given the three types parameters involves a specification of both the illuminant and
of color receptors in the eye, it is most common to specify the the observer that was used in the conversion and should be
color an observer would detect with three color parameters. included with the resultant color parameters. There are
Although other color order systems described color as being multiple illuminants possible, including the CIE Illuminant
three-dimensional,8 Munsell was the first to separate into A which represents a glass-enclosed tungsten-filament bulb,
perceptually uniform and independent dimensions of hue, the CIE Illuminants B and C which were but are no longer
value and chroma, and was the first to systematically illustrate recommended for use in describing daylight, various CIE D
the colors in three-dimensional space.9 illuminants used to describe various daylight conditions (e.g.,
For materials, it is the interaction of the illuminant and the D50, D55, D65, and D75), and various CIE F illuminants for
material which allows for light to be either reflected or fluorescent lamps.11
transmitted to a human observer, depending on the relative The conversion to three colorimetric parameters was
placements of the illuminant, the material and the observer.10 originally established for converting spectrophotometric data
The conversion of spectrophotometric measurements to three to tristimulus values, X, Y and Z. Strictly, the tristimulus values
color parameters is described by the International Commis- X, Y and Z are each calculated by integrating the color stimulus
sion on Illumination8,11 (known as the CIE for its name in multiplied by the respective color-matching function, x̄ðlÞ,
French) and has been well exemplified.10 This conversion ȳðlÞ, or z̄ðlÞ, of the observer over the entire visible range of
requires knowledge of: (1) the spectrum of light from the wavelengths, which is 380 nm to 780 nm. The color-matching
illuminant, (2) the spectrum reflected or transmitted by the functions of the observer are easily available in the litera-
material, and (3) the three spectral observation characteristics ture.10,11 For objects observed in reflection, the color stimulus
of the human observer. Initially, only observation data was is the product of the absolute spectral reflectance of the object
available for humans observing a circular image which formed and the relative spectral power of the illuminant. In practice,
a solid angle of 28 from the eye of the observer, and this these integrations are approximated by establishing a Dl of
observation mode is know as the CIE 28 1931 standard usually 5 nm and using sums of the product of the absolute
colorimetric observer. This solid angle, known as the angular spectral reflectance of the object, the relative spectral power of
subtense, relates the size of a circular observed image normal the illuminant, the respective color-matching function of the
to its distance from the eye of the observer.10 The CIE 28 1931 observer, and Dl. These approximations for observing in
standard colorimetric observer is recommended for fields of reflection are:
angular subtense between about 18 and 48.11 The observation X
characteristics of the CIE 1964 supplementary standard X¼k ðRðlÞSðlÞx̄ðlÞ DlÞ;
l
colorimetric observer were established using images which
formed a 108 solid angle between the eye and the image, and is X
recommended for fields of angular subtense greater than Y¼k ðRðlÞSðlÞȳðlÞ DlÞ; and
l
about 48,11 which is a more common observation mode for
larger objects at close observation distances. It is important to X
distinguish between the angular subtense and the angle of Z¼k ðRðlÞSðlÞz̄ðlÞ DlÞ;
l
viewing involved in visual observation or, as described below,
P
the viewing geometry of a spectrophotometric or colorimetric where k ¼ 100= l ðSðlÞȳðlÞ DlÞ, R(l) is the absolute reflectance
measuring system. of the object, and S(l) is the spectral power of the illuminant. It
Some colorimeters approximate with filters the light from a is this integration into three parameters of color which allow
specific illuminant and the specific observation characteristics for the metamerism which can occur between two materials
of the human observer. This color data is then valid only for which differing spectral characteristics. Metamerism occurs
that illuminant and observer. when these two materials have identical color under one
Significant advantages to spectrophotometric measure- illuminant, but different colors under another illuminant.
ments include the ability to analyze the principal components Color differences under more than one illuminant are neces-
of a series of spectra and the ability to convert spectro- sary to evaluate metamerism due to an illuminant change,
e4 journal of dentistry 37s (2009) e2–e6

which has been identified as a significant issue for some laser and conventional light sources.31 For translucent
maxillofacial prostheses.16 materials, Bolt et al.32 and ten Bosch and Coops33 further
Further, CIE describes a transformation of tristimulus describe how the limited size of the opening allowed some of
values into the CIE L* a* b* color space, which was intended the illuminating beam to be scattered within the material
to be uniform in each of its three directions of color, L*, a* and beyond the edge of the opening, especially when measuring
b*.11 CIE L*, known as lightness, is directly related to Munsell translucent tooth structure, and that the amount of edge-loss
Value. A distinct advantage of the CIE L* a* b* color space was was greater for smaller openings. Edge-loss has also been
the simplicity of calculating a color difference between two demonstrated for translucent pigmented maxillofacial mate-
colors using: rials, demonstrating that edge-loss may occur in either
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi spectrophotometric or colorimetric measurement of translu-
DEab  ¼ ðDLÞ2 þ ðDaÞ2 þ ðDbÞ2 ; cent materials, depending on its inherent optical properties
and the sizes of both the illumining light beam and the
where DL*, Da*, and Db* are the respective differences in the L*, specimen port opening.34,35
a* and b* color parameters between two colors.11 Subse- In effect, edge-loss is caused by a shadow from the edge of
quently, the revised CIE L0 a0 b0 uniform color space was recom- the specimen opening within the translucent material, which
mended by the CIE for use in calculating a newly allows the shadow to influence the intensity of the observa-
recommended color difference,17 called CIEDE2000. Although tion. Edge-loss can be avoided by avoiding a measurement
the transformation from the CIE L* a* b* to the revised CIE system which uses an opening or aperture to position the
L0 a0 b0 uniform color space is rather simple, the revised specimen relative to the illumination and observation com-
CIEDE2000 color difference formula involves multiple conver- ponents. Such non-contact systems have been described
sions, averaging, and additional terms, as shown by Luo et al.18 which utilize a 458/08 illumination/observation geometry4,32
Further, the CIEDE2000 utilizes the concepts of chroma and but unfortunately this system uses only a single-beam,
hue, reinforcing the importance of the conceptual develop- whereas dual-beam systems allow for automatic compensa-
ments of Munsell. Although most color differences reported in tion for any drifting in the intensity of the illumination. Given
the current dental literature are based on the CIE L* a* b* the wide range of translucency of natural1,36 and restorative
system, some comparison of these two color differences is dental materials37,38 and the importance of translucency in
available.19 determining appearance characteristics,39,40 a color measure-
Color difference has been used extensively in dental ment system which avoids edge-loss is essential for determin-
research and applications, including descriptions of coverage ing universally valid optical properties.
error of dental shade guides,20,21 the magnitude of color
instability of dental polymers,15,22 the change caused by
processing dental materials,23,24 the mismatch caused by 4. Accuracy and repeatability of color
inadequate color specification for prosthetic materials,25 color measurements
accuracy and repeatability,26,27 color perceptibility and accept-
ability,28,29 and as a translucency parameter.30 It can be The two separate aspects of measurement error involve a lack
expected therefore that the revised color difference formula of accuracy or validity and a lack of precision.41 Precision may
will be used also for these applications. be described with the repeatability of only the measuring
device over time or the reproducibility of the entire measure-
ment process, including specimen positioning. Accuracy of a
3. Instrument illuminating and viewing color measuring device may be assessed by comparing a test
geometries instrument to a reference instrument which is considered to
be correct, and precision assessed by comparing repeated
CIE has also described the geometries of the illuminating light measures of the same specimen or standard.
path and of the measured or viewed light path in color Accuracy and repeatability of color measurements may
measurement systems.11 For measurement of reflecting each also be assessed in absolute or relative terms, where
specimens, CIE recommends using one of four illuminating absolute refers to the three color parameters of a single color
and viewing geometries: (1) 458/normal (or 08), (2) normal/458, and relative refers to the color difference between two
(3) diffuse/normal, and (4) normal/diffuse. Every standard colors.26 For either absolute or relative validity or absolute
geometry recommended by the CIE requires a constant or relative repeatability, color differences maybe used for
positioning of the specimen surface from the illuminant assessment. However, color measures which have an inherent
and the observation (or detection) systems, as light intensity is deficiency, such as those of small opening contact colori-
well known to vary with distance from the source.10 Such a meters when measuring teeth, may be more deficient in one
constant positioning is usually implemented by having an color parameter than another,32 so it is also pertinent to
opening over which the material was placed for a reflectance evaluate absolute validity by comparing each of the three color
measurement. Such openings were meant for use with opaque parameters of the test instrument respectively to that of the
materials and standards8 and were applicable to either reference instrument.
spectrophotometric or colorimetric measurements. Normally, validity is assured by employing a calibration
However, also of consideration for translucent materials process which uses one or more known standards and setting
was the size of the light beam relative to the size of the the instrument to give the valid measure when measuring
opening and a correction method was described which used these standards. However, given the possibility that the
 journal of dentistry 37s (2009) e2–e6 e5

standard may have a different translucency than the speci- Conflict of interest statement
men and that translucency may influence measurement error,
simple calibration using only a single standard is insufficient No conflict of interest is declared for this work.
to assure the validity of color measurements of specimens of
varying translucency.
references
Interest in digital imaging for color matching and commu-
nication has received increased interest.27,42 Such systems
must undergo the same basic assessments of accuracy and
repeatability as any other device. Commonly, repeatability is 1. Ragain RC, Johnston WM. Accuracy of Kubelka-Munk
reflectance theory applied to human dentin and enamel.
assessed,43–46 but validity is at least equally important for
Journal of Dental Research 2001;80:449–52.
communication of information for color reproduction. Also, it 2. O’Brien WJ, Johnston WM, Fanian F. Double-layer color
is very common to see standard correlation coefficients and effects in porcelain systems. Journal of Dental Research
associated tests for statistical significance being used as 1985;64:940–3.
indicators of consistency. A usual test for statistical signifi- 3. Clark EB. An analysis of tooth color. Journal of the American
cance for a correlation coefficient is to test the hypothesis that Dental Association 1931;18:2093–103.
4. Gozalo-Diaz DJ, Lindsey DT, Johnston WM, Wee AG.
the population correlation coefficient is zero. Such a test
Measurement of color for craniofacial structures using a 45/
would only indicate if correlation is not null, whereas
0-degree optical configuration. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
considerations of the coefficients of determination and 2007;97:45–53.
alienation may better assess any weakness in the agree- 5. Ishikawa-Nagai S, Da Silva JD, Weber HP, Park SE. Optical
ment.47 Further, a common statistical method to assess phenomenon of peri-implant soft tissue. Part II. preferred
absolute or relative repeatability or reliability is to use an implant neck color to improve soft tissue esthetics. Clinical
intraclass correlation coefficient.47,48 oral implants research 2007;18:575–80.
6. Hecht E. Optics, 4th ed.. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley;
2002 .
7. Williamson SJ, Cummins HZ. Light and color in nature and
5. Acceptability and perceptibility of color art. New York: Wiley; 1983.
differences 8. Smith T, Guild J. The C.I.E. colorimetric standards and their
use. Transactions of the Optical Society 1932;33:73–130. (with
When the CIE DEab color difference equation was developed, it discussion on pp. 130–134).
was evaluated for the level color acceptability using color 9. Kuehni RG. The early development of the Munsell system.
Color Research and Application 2002;27:20–7.
professionals, who basically interpreted a perceived color
10. Wyszecki G, Stiles WS. Color science: concepts and
difference as unacceptable, and this perceptibility level was methods, quantitative data and formulae. 2nd ed. New
found to be approximately a DEab of one over the entire range York: Wiley; 1982.
of colors.49 However, most natural tooth colors are known to 11. Commission Internationale de l’Eclairage (CIE). Colorimetry,
be limited and the level of perceptibility of a difference may be 3rd ed. Publication CIE No. 15.3. Vienna, Austria: Central
better defined within these colors. Further, tooth colors have Bureau of the CIE, 2004.
12. Tzeng D-Y, Berns RS. A Review of principal component
a natural yet perceptible variation within and among
analysis and its applications to color technology. Color
different teeth within the same mouth,50 so it is common
Research and Application 2005;30:84–98.
to distinguish between perceptibility and acceptability 13. Farrar SK, Roberts C, Johnston WM, Weber PA. Optical
limits.51–53 properties of human trabecular meshwork in the visible and
Another important statistical technique for the evaluation near-infrared region. Lasers in Surgery and Medicine
of color measuring devices when used to produce restorations 1999;25:348–62.
is the odds ratio of acceptance.54 Using a preset level of 14. Johnston WM, O’Brien WJ, Tien T-Y. The determination
of optical absorption and scattering in translucent
acceptability for color differences that were determined for
porcelain. Color Research and Application 1986;11:
the compared systems or by having evaluators directly judge 125–30.
acceptance, the odds ratio would provide how more frequently 15. Johnston WM, Reisbick MH. Color and translucency changes
one system would be accepted over the other.47 during and after curing of esthetic restorative materials.
Dental Materials 1997;13:89–97.
16. Seelaus R, Troppmann RJ. Facial prosthesis fabrication:
coloration techniques. In: Taylor TD, editor. Clinical
6. Conclusions
maxillofacial prosthetics. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing;
2000. p. 245–64. Chapter 17.
The color of an object involves the modification of the spectral 17. Commission Internationale de l’Eclairage (CIE). CIE
energy from the illuminant by the object and the processing by Technical Report: Improvement to Industrial Color-
an observer of this modified spectral energy from the object Difference Evaluation. CIE Pub No 142-2001. Vienna, Austria:
relative to the energy direct from the illuminant. Further Central Bureau of the CIE, 2001.
involved are the geometrical relationships of the illuminant, 18. Luo MR, Cui G, Rigg B. The development of the CIE 2000 color
difference formula: CIEDE2000. Color Research and Application
the object and the observer, and any intervening optical
2001;26:340–50.
interference. Such complexity requires attention to accuracy
19. Pérez Mdel M, Saleh A, Yebra A, Pulgar R. Study of the
and reliability of any spectral or color measurement system, variation between CIELAB delta E* and CIEDE2000 color-
with further attention to the proper statistical parameters to differences of resin composites. Dental Materials Journal
evaluate accuracy and reliability. 2007;26:21–8.
e6 journal of dentistry 37s (2009) e2–e6

20. O’Brien WJ, Boenke KM, Groh CL. Coverage errors of two shade 37. Chen YM, Smales RJ, Yip KH, Sung WJ. Translucency and
guides. International Journal of Prosthodontics 1991;4:45–50. biaxial flexural strength of four ceramic core materials.
21. Bayindir F, Kuo S, Johnston WM, Wee AG. Coverage error of Dental Materials 2008;24:1506–11.
three conceptually different shade guide systems to vital 38. Lee YK, Lu H, Powers JM. Optical properties of four esthetic
unrestored dentition. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry restorative materials after accelerated aging. American
2007;98:175–85. Journal of Dentistry 2006;19:155–8.
22. Kiat-Amnuay S, Mekayarajjananonth T, Powers JM, 39. Paravina RD, Westland S, Kimura M, Powers JM, Imai FH.
Chambers MS, Lemon JC. Interactions of pigments and Color interaction of dental materials: blending effect of
opacifiers on color stability of MDX4-4210/type A layered composites. Dental Materials 2006;22:903–8.
maxillofacial elastomers subjected to artificial aging. Journal 40. Paravina RD, Westland S, Johnston WM, Powers JM. Color
of Prosthetic Dentistry 2006;95:249–57. adjustment potential of resin composites. Journal of Dental
23. Rosenstiel SF, Baiker MA, Johnston WM. A comparison of Research 2008;87:499–503.
glazed and polished dental porcelain. International Journal of 41. Berns RS, Billmeyer FW, Saltzman M. Billmeyer and
Prosthodontics 1989;2:524–9. Saltzman’s principles of color technology. 3rd ed. New York:
24. Rosenstiel SF, Porter SS, Johnston WM. Color measurements Wiley; 2000.
of all-ceramic crown systems. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 42. Jarad FD, Russell MD, Moss BW. The use of digital imaging
1989;16:491–501. for color matching and communication in restorative
25. Wee AG, Wei-Yi C, Johnston WM. Color formulation and dentistry. British Dental Journal 2005;199:43–9.
reproduction of opaque dental ceramic. Dental Materials 43. Tung FF, Goldstein GR, Jang S, Hittelman E. The repeatability
2005;21:665–70. of an intraoral dental colorimeter. Journal of Prosthetic
26. Seghi RR, Johnston WM, O’Brien WJ. Performance Dentistry 2002;88:585–90.
assessment of colorimetric devices on dental porcelains. 44. Khurana R, Tredwin CJ, Weisbloom M, Moles DR. A clinical
Journal of Dental Research 1989;68:1755–9. evaluation of the individual repeatability of three
27. Wee AG, Lindsey DT, Kuo S, Johnston WM. Color accuracy of commercially available color measuring devices. British
commercial digital cameras for use in dentistry. Dental Dental Journal 2007;203:675–80.
Materials 2006;22:553–9. 45. Derdilopoulou FV, Zantner C, Neumann K, Kielbassa AM.
28. Ragain JC, Johnston WM. Color acceptance of direct dental Evaluation of visual and spectrophotometric shade
restorative materials by human observers. Color Research and analyses: a clinical comparison of 3758 teeth. International
Application 2000;25:278–85. Journal of Prosthodontics 2007;20:414–6.
29. Wee AG, Lindsey DT, Shroyer KM, Johnston WM. Use of a 46. Ratzmann A, Klinke T, Schwahn C, Treichel A, Gedrange T.
porcelain color discrimination test to evaluate color Reproducibility of electronic tooth color measurements.
difference formulas. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Biomedizinische Technik (Biomedical engineering) 2008;53:259–
2007;98:101–9. 63.
30. Johnston WM, Ma T, Kienle BH. Translucency parameter of 47. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ. Biometry. 3rd ed. New York: WH
colorants for maxillofacial prostheses. International Journal of Freeman; 1995.
Prosthodontics 1995;8. 79 86. 48. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing
31. Hsai JJ. Optical radiation measurements: The translucent rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin 1979;86:420–8.
blurring effect - method of evaluation and estimation. NBS 49. Kuehni RG, Marcus RT. A experiment in visual scaling of
Technical Note 594-12. Washington, DC: US Department of small color difference. Color Research and Application
Commerce National Bureau of Standards, Optics Physics 1979;4:83–91.
Division, 1976. 50. Karamouzos A, Papadopoulos MA, Kolokithas G, Athanasiou
32. Bolt RA, ten Bosch JJ, Coops JC. Influence of window size in AE. Precision of in vivo spectrophotometric color
small-window color measurement, particularly of teeth. evaluation of natural teeth. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation
Physics in Medicine and Biology 1994;39:1133–42. 2007;34:613–21.
33. ten Bosch JJ, Coops JC. Tooth color and reflectance as related 51. Douglas RD, Brewer JD. Acceptability of shade differences in
to light scattering and enamel hardness. Journal of Dental metal ceramic crowns. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Research 1995;74:374–80. 1998;79:254–60.
34. Rugh ER, Johnston WM, Hesse NS. The relationship between 52. Ragain JC, Johnston WM. Minimum color differences for
elastomer opacity, colorimeter beam size and measure discriminating mismatch between composite and tooth
colorimetric response. International Journal of Prosthodontics color. Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry 2001;13:41–8.
1991;4:569–76. 1991. 53. Douglas RD, Steinhauer TJ, Wee AG. Intraoral determination
35. Johnston WM, Hesse NS, Davis BK, Seghi RR. Analysis of of the tolerance of dentists for perceptibility and
edge-losses in reflectance measurements of pigmented acceptability of shade mismatch. Journal of Prosthetic
maxillofacial elastomer. Journal of Dental Research Dentistry 2007;97:200–8.
1996;75:752–60. 54. Da Silva JD, Park SE, Weber H-P, Ishikawa-Nagai S. Clinical
36. Yu B, Ahn JS, Lee YK. Measurement of translucency of tooth performance of a newly developed spectrophotometric
enamel and dentin. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica system on tooth color reproduction. Journal of Prosthetic
2009;67:57–64. Dentistry 2008;99:361–8.