Based on previous visual assessments of 440 color pairs of 3D-printed samples, we tested the performance of eight color-difference formulas (CIELAB, CIEDE2000, CAM02-LCD, CAM02-SCD, CAM02-UCS, CAM16-LCD, CAM16-SCD, and CAM16-UCS) using the standardized residual sum of squares (STRESS) index. For the whole set of 440 color pairs, the introduction of kL (lightness parametric factor), b (exponent in total color difference), and kL + b produced an average STRESS decrease of 2.6%, 26.9%, and 29.6%, respectively. In most cases, the CIELAB formula was significantly worse statistically than the remaining seven formulas, for which no statistically significant differences were found. Therefore, based on visual results using 3D-object colors with the specific shape, size, gloss, and magnitude of color differences considered here, we concluded that the CIEDE2000, CAM02-, and CAM16-based formulas were equivalent and thus cannot recommend only one of them. Disregarding CIELAB, the average STRESS decreases in the kL + b-optimized formulas from changes in each one of the four analyzed parametric factors were not statistically significant and had the following values: 6.2 units changing from color pairs with less to more than 5.0 CIELAB units; 2.9 units changing the shape of the samples (lowest STRESS values for cylinders); 0.7 units changing from nearly-matte to high-gloss samples; and 0.5 units changing from 4 cm to 2 cm samples.
Keywords: 3D color printing; CIECAM02; CIECAM16; CIEDE2000; color difference.