Color variations during digital imaging of facial prostheses subjected to unfiltered ambient light and image calibration techniques within dental clinics: An in vitro analysis

• Published in: PloS one 2022-08, Vol.17 (8), p.e0273029-e0273029
• Main Authors: Rashid, Farah, Jamayet, Nafij Bin, Farook, Taseef Hasan, AL-Rawas, Matheel, Barman, Aparna, Johari, Yanti, Noorani, Tahir Yusuf, Abdullah, Johari Yap, Eusufzai, Sumaiya Zabin, Alam, Mohammad Khursheed
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Analysis; Biology and Life Sciences; Calibration; Clinics; Color; Computer and Information Sciences; Dentistry; Digital cameras; Digital imaging; Engineering and Technology; Image acquisition; Image processing; Imaging systems; Implants, Artificial; Light; Lighting; Maxillofacial; Medicine and Health Sciences; Optical properties; Physical Sciences; Prostheses; Prosthesis; Prosthetics; Research and Analysis Methods; Silicones; Spectrophotometers; Spectrophotometry; Variation; White balancing
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0273029

The study aimed to evaluate 1) the amount of color variations presents within clinical images of maxillofacial prosthetic silicone specimens when photographed under different clinically relevant ambient lighting conditions, and 2) whether white balance calibration (WBC) methods were able to mitigate variations in ambient lighting. 432 measurements were acquired from standardized images of the pigmented prosthetic silicone specimens within different ambient lighting conditions (i.e., 2 windowed and 2 windowless clinics) at noon with no light modifying apparatus. The specimens were photographed once without any white balance calibration (raw), then independently alongside an 18% neutral gray card and Macbeth color chart for calibration in a post-processing (PPWBC) software, and once after camera calibration (CWBC) using a gray card. The LAB color values were extracted from the images and color variations ([DELTA]E) were calculated after referring to the corresponding spectrophotometric values as control. Images in windowless and windowed clinics exhibited highly significant differences (p 0.05) in LAB values across windowed clinics. PPWBC using Macbeth color chart produced no significant differences for a* values (p > 0.05) across all clinics while PPWBC by gray card showed no significant differences (p > 0.05) in LAB values when only similar clinics (either windowed or windowless) were compared. Significant color variations were present for maxillofacial prosthetic specimens owing to natural ambient light. CWBC and PPWBC using color charts were more suitable for color correction across windowed clinics while CWBC and PPWBC using gray cards had better outcomes across windowless setups.