U.S. patent application number 10/195251 was filed with the patent office on 2003-10-30 for method and apparatus for approving color samples.
This patent application is currently assigned to Clariant International, Ltd.. Invention is credited to Agarwal, Niraj.
Application Number | 20030204410 10/195251 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 29254119 |
Filed Date | 2003-10-30 |
United States Patent
Application |
20030204410 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Agarwal, Niraj |
October 30, 2003 |
Method and apparatus for approving color samples
Abstract
A color approval system that facilitates the use of electronic
color submissions. The electronic color submissions contain
reflectance values for a physical color sample to be submitted for
approval. The system includes a data storage area accessible by a
submitter of the electronic color sample and a reviewer of the
color sample. The submitter upload the submission to the data
storage area, from which the reviewer retrieves the submission and
replies with an acceptance or rejection, typically via e-mail. The
system provides tools for the analysis of the electronic color
sample and automatic formation of acceptances and rejections.
Inventors: |
Agarwal, Niraj; (Charlotte,
NC) |
Correspondence
Address: |
CLARIANT CORPORATION
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY DEPARTMENT
4000 MONROE ROAD
CHARLOTTE
NC
28205
US
|
Assignee: |
Clariant International,
Ltd.
|
Family ID: |
29254119 |
Appl. No.: |
10/195251 |
Filed: |
July 15, 2002 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
60376007 |
Apr 26, 2002 |
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
382/162 |
Current CPC
Class: |
G06Q 30/06 20130101;
G01J 3/524 20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
705/1 |
International
Class: |
G06F 017/60 |
Claims
1. A method for approving a color, the method comprising: analyzing
an electronic color submission with software tools; checking at
least one reason for rejection from a list of reasons;
automatically preparing a response to the electronic color
submission based on the reasons checked; and electronically sending
the response to a vendor associated with the color submission.
2. A method, as set forth in claim 1, wherein the step of analyzing
the electronic color submission comprises: simulating the
appearance of the color submission under a plurality of lights.
3. A method, as set forth in claim 1, wherein the step of analyzing
the electronic color submission comprises: generating a CIE a*-b*
plot comparing a color standard with the color submission.
4. A method, as set forth in claim 1, wherein the step of analyzing
the electronic color submission comprises: simulating the
appearance of the color submission on a plurality of textures.
5. A method as set forth in claim 1, further comprising: scanning a
color sample to obtain reflectance values; preparing the electronic
color submission using the reflectance values; and storing the
electronic color submission in a location accessible by the
software tools.
6. A method, as set forth in claim 5, further comprising:
calibrating the device used to scan the color sample based on a
master scanning device.
7. A method, as set forth in claim 5, wherein the step of storing
comprises: transmitting, via the Internet, the electronic color
submission to a server accessible by the software tools.
8. A method, as set forth in claim 5, wherein the step of storing
comprises: e-mailing the electronic color submission to an account
accessible by the software tools.
9. A method for approving a color, the method comprising: using a
software routine to compare first reflectance values of a desired
color with reflectance values contained in a plurality of
electronic color submissions and identifying those electronic
submission that are acceptable and those electronic submissions
that are unacceptable; automatically preparing a responses to the
acceptable and unacceptable electronic color submissions based on
the comparison; and electronically sending the responses to a
vendors associated with the color submissions.
10. A method, as set forth in claim 9, wherein the software also
identifying marginal electronic color submissions that require an
operator's review to determine whether such submissions are
acceptable or unacceptable.
11. A method, as set forth in claim 10, further comprising:
analyzing the marginal electronic color submissions with software
tools; checking acceptance or at least one reason for rejection
from a list of reasons; and automatically preparing a response to
the electronic color submission based on the acceptance or reasons
checked.
12. A method, as set forth in claim 11, wherein the step of
analyzing the electronic color submission comprises: simulating the
appearance of the color submission under a plurality of lights.
13. A method, as set forth in claim 11, wherein the step of
analyzing the electronic color submission comprises: generating a
CIE a*-b* plot comparing a color standard with the color
submission.
14. A method, as set forth in claim 11, wherein the step of
analyzing the electronic color submission comprises: simulating the
appearance of the color submission on a plurality of textures.
15. A method as set forth in claim 9, further comprising: scanning
a color sample to obtain reflectance values; preparing the
electronic color submission using the reflectance values; and
storing the electronic color submission in a location accessible by
the software tools.
16. A method, as set forth in claim 9, further comprising:
calibrating the device used to scan the color sample based on a
master scanning device.
17. A method, as set forth in claim 9, wherein the step of storing
comprises: transmitting, via the Internet, the electronic color
submission to a server accessible by the software tools.
18. A method, as set forth in claim 9, wherein the step of storing
comprises: e-mailing the electronic color submission to an account
accessible by the software tools.
19. A system for approving a color, the system comprising: a first
computing device associated with a submitter of a color sample, the
first computing device programmed to prepare a submission
containing an electronic representation of the color sample; a
first data storage location that receives the submission; a second
computing device associated with an approver of the color sample,
the second computing device programmed to compare the submission
with an expected color and assist the approver by automatically
preparing a rejection to the electronic color submission based on
at least one reason indicated by the approver; and a second data
storage location that receives the rejection, the second data
storage location accessible by the first computing device.
20. The system, as set forth in claim 19, further comprising: a
first spectrophotometer associated with the first computing device
that generates reflectance values of the color sample for inclusion
with the submission.
21. The system, as set forth in claim 19, further comprising: a
third computing device that prepares a request for a submission; a
third data storage location that receives the request, the third
data storage location accessible by the first computing device.
22. The system, as set forth in claim 21, further comprising: a
first spectrophotometer associated with the first computing device
that generates reflectance values of the color sample for inclusion
with the submission.
23. The system, as set forth in claim 22, further comprising: a
second spectrophotometer associated with the third computing device
that generates reflectance values of the expected color for
inclusion with the submission.
24. The system, as set forth in claim 23, further comprising:
calibration software that calibrates the first spectrophotometer to
the second spectrophotometer.
25. The system, as set forth in claim 24, wherein the calibration
software creates a plurality of correction factors that can be
applied to the output of the first spectrophotometer to transform
the output to simulate the output of the second spectrophotometer.
Description
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
[0001] Color management is extremely important to many retail
industries where sales are often related to the ability of a
retailer to offer products in colors that are currently popular.
Taking the textile/apparel industry as an example, the popularity
of certain colors waxes and wanes seasonally, requiring the
retailer to be ever vigilant regarding the color of the products
offered for sale. Manufacturers, distributors, designers and
retailers (simply termed retailer hereinafter), are continually
seeking methods and apparatus to ensure consistency of color in the
products that they offer for sale. This starts with the colorants,
including pigments and dyes, that are used to color, e.g. dye, the
material used in their products. Many retailers are faced with the
further task of ensuring color-coordination of products on
different materials, such as different fabrics, ceramics, plastics,
etc. Compounding the difficulties of such a task, materials from
different vendors have a tendency to behave differently as viewing
conditions change, such as, natural daylight versus artificial
lighting, or viewing angle. Given that a fairly typical retailer
in, for example, the textile/apparel industry, may purchase the
same textile/apparel products from ten different vendors in six
different countries on three different continents, the time and
resources spent on color management becomes significant.
[0002] Continuing with our example the textile industry, when
purchasing textile products for resale, a retailer creates a
specification that may include: a pattern; a fabric; a color name;
and reflectance data associated with the desired color and fabric.
The specification is provided to multiple vendors. These vendors in
turn may sub-contract out some of the materials and or dying
process. For example, a dye house may be asked to match the color
of the fabric requested by the retailer and dye the fabric for
subsequent assembly of the textile product. To do this, the dye
house may use internal resources or consult external resources,
such as a colorant manufacturer. Often, the match is not perfect,
but instead is an approximation with colorants available to the
professional performing the match. Recognizing this, most retailers
require that a sample produced using the color match be sent to the
retailer for approval of the color match. A color-matching
professional associated with the retailer will review the sample
and report the results back to the vendor. Experience has shown
that for every sample approved, six are rejected.
[0003] A modern color office has a couple of automated tools at its
disposal to assist with the reviewing process. Upon reception of
the color sample, a spectrophotometer can be used to obtain
reflectance data that can be compared, either manually or
automatically, to reflectance data for an approved sample. A light
box that simulates several different light sources can aid in
determining if the sample has unacceptable metamerism. A word
processor can be used to generate an acceptance or rejection
letter. More verbose rejection letters include comments from the
reviewer that attempt to provide guidance for future submissions,
perhaps even including a suggested color recipe. Finally, the
letter can be sent using e-mail or a facsimile machine.
[0004] Color selection is a time consuming process that has
heretofore required a highly experienced color matching
professional to ensure consistency across several product lines. A
color matching professional may be called on to review a hundred or
more submissions per day. In the past, this has required hours of
effort analyzing each submission, identifying deficiencies and
preparing detailed reports in an effort to avoid further failed
attempts. With a trend toward color coordination in almost every
consumer product, the amount of time and resources being devoted to
selecting colors is becoming significant and is outpacing the
availability of color matching professionals.
[0005] For example, consider the automotive industry. It is not
uncommon for an automaker to coordinate matching colors in the
interior of an automobile. This requires matching color across a
variety of materials, including: plastic, leather, metal, and
fabric. Given that each type of material requires separate
approvals (each with a 6-to-1 rejection ratio), such matching has,
in the past, required an extraordinary amount of effort from
color-matching professionals.
[0006] Another example is the athletic shoe industry. The current
style in sneakers includes a mix of a variety of different
materials, each of which must be dyed so as to match the other
materials. It is possible that any given sneaker will contain
several, if not all, of the following materials: cotton, polyester,
nylon, leather, rubber, metal and plastic. Each material needs to
be individually color matched. Further, it is not uncommon for
other types of products, such as clothing; bags; and watches, to be
promotionally tied with a sneaker line, presenting additional
materials that require dyeing to a predetermined color.
[0007] Co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/883,647,
entitled: A PROCESS FOR COLOR MANAGEMENT, incorporated herein by
reference, describes the use of an engineered color standard (ECS)
by a retailer for controlling a color quality across multiple
suppliers. Co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/109,122,
entitled METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR COLOR MANAGEMENT, incorporated
herein by reference, describes apparatus and methods for generating
color recipes. However, the apparatus and methods described in
these applications do not provide tools that directly assist the
color matching professional with reviewing the hundreds of
submissions on a daily basis. The present invention provides
improved methods and apparatus that automate much of the color
sample review process.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
[0008] The present invention is directed to software, an on-line
information system and methods of doing business that links the
manufacturers and vendors of colored materials (textiles, leather,
plastics etc.) with the seller/retailer through a digital hub to
enable exchange of color information. According to one aspect, the
present invention comprises software accessible from a user's
desktop and a centrally accessible data storage facility, such as a
web folder for sharing information regarding color approval,
between a vendor and a retailer.
[0009] Color information for color standards are made available to
all the system users through a web folder. Providing a web folder
through which color information can be retrieved ensures that the
manufacturers have immediate access to up to date information.
Color samples are measured by remote users (manufacturers or
vendors) on a spectrophotometer, or other color analysis apparatus,
and the color data is transmitted to the web folder. The
manufacturer/vendor also fills out an onscreen form for the color
sample and transmits that along with the color data. This color
data and the information from the onscreen form constitutes a color
or electronic submit (referred to herein as an electronic color
submission) that can be reviewed on-line by the color analyst at
the retailers office, or any other location wherein access to the
system is available. The color analyst can then determine, using
the data present in the electronic submit, whether to accept or
reject the color sample of the manufacturer/vendor.
[0010] Preferably, the electronic color submission is used instead
of a physical submit sent by mail, thereby significantly reducing
the time necessary to reject or accept a color sample generated by
the manufacturer/vendor. In an alternative embodiment, the software
enables the manufacturer/vendor to print the information contained
in the electronic color submission onto a submit form, attach
samples and send a physical submit in addition to the electronic
submit. In certain circumstances, physical submits are needed for
samples that are difficult to measure accurately.
[0011] The system is designed to provide a unified on-line method
for handling physical and electronic color submissions, which
significantly reduces the time necessary to reject or accept a
color sample from a manufacturer/vendor, and the costs associated
therewith.
[0012] In accordance with the present invention, the color analyst
can view a plurality of electronic color submissions that have been
received on the web folder from one or more manufacturers/vendors.
The color for the standard and the sample submitted are represented
onscreen, as they would appear in three different types of
ruminants. The numeric values and plots of the color difference and
its components (lightness, chroma, hue) are also shown. The
software allows quick comparison of the submitted sample with
previous submits for the same color from the same or a different
vendor. The analyst can make an assessment based on this
information and approve or reject the sample along with comments.
The color analyst's response, i.e. rejection or acceptance, is
preferably sent by email to the submitter.
[0013] The email system is integrated with the client software to
automate and accelerate the process of sending out these responses.
The software allows the addition of standardized comments about the
color analysis to the email. Color plots and on-screen color
representations are also included in the response. Colorant recipes
that can achieve the target color can also be included if
necessary.
[0014] The software keeps a log of the electronic color submissions
received and the responses sent. This information can be
transferred to a database and the information analyzed to identify
problem areas.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0015] An understanding of the present invention can be gained from
the following detailed description of the invention, taken in
conjunction with the accompanying drawings of which:
[0016] FIG. 1 is a block diagram of an apparatus for approving
color samples in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the
present invention.
[0017] FIG. 2 is a workflow diagram of a color approval system in
accordance with the preferred embodiment of the present
invention.
[0018] FIG. 3 is an illustration of a display produced by an
apparatus for approving color samples in accordance with a
preferred embodiment of the present invention.
[0019] FIG. 4 is an illustration of another display produced by an
apparatus for approving color samples in accordance with a
preferred embodiment of the present invention.
[0020] FIG. 5 is an illustration of another display 500 produced by
an apparatus for approving color samples in accordance with a
preferred embodiment of the present invention.
[0021] FIG. 6 is a flowchart of a method for certifying a
spectrophotometer in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the
present invention.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0022] Reference will now be made in detail to the present
invention, examples of which are illustrated in the accompanying
drawings, wherein like reference numerals refer to like elements
throughout.
[0023] The detailed description that follows presents methods that
may be embodied wholly or partially by routines and symbolic
representations of operations of data bits within a computer
readable medium, associated processors, networks, and network
devices. A method is here, and generally, conceived to be a
sequence of steps or actions leading to a desired result, and as
such, encompasses such terms of art as "program," "objects,"
"functions," "routines," "subroutines," and "procedures." These
descriptions and representations are the means used by those
skilled in the art effectively convey the substance of their work
to others skilled in the art.
[0024] In general, many of the steps in the present method require
physical manipulation of data representing physical quantities.
Usually, though not necessarily, these quantities take the form of
electrical or magnetic signals capable of being stored,
transferred, combined, compared or otherwise manipulated. Those of
ordinary skill in the art conveniently refer to these signals as
"bits", "values", "elements", "symbols", "characters", "images",
"terms", "numbers", or the like. It should be recognized that these
and similar terms are to be associated with the appropriate
physical quantities and are merely convenient labels applied to
these quantities.
[0025] Some of the apparatus set forth in the present application
may be specifically constructed for the required purpose, i.e.
color matching, but the methods recited herein may operate on a
general purpose computer or other network device selectively
activated or reconfigured by a routine stored in the computer and
interface with the necessary color sensing equipment. More to the
point, the methods presented herein are not inherently related to
any particular computer system. In particular, various machines may
be used with routines in accordance with the teachings herein. On
the other hand, it may prove more convenient to construct more
specialized apparatus to perform the required method steps. In
certain circumstances, when it is desirable that a piece of
hardware possesses certain characteristics, these characteristics
are described more fully in the following text. Machines that may
perform the functions of the present invention include those
manufactured by such companies as HEWLETT PACKARD, DELL and
DATACOLOR as well as other manufacturers of computer and color
analysis equipment.
[0026] With respect to the software described herein, those of
ordinary skill in the art will recognize that there exist a variety
of platforms and languages for creating software for performing the
procedures outlined herein. The preferred embodiment of the present
invention can be implemented using MICROSOFT VISUAL BASIC, however,
those of ordinary skill in the art also recognize that the choice
of the exact platform and language is often dictated by the
specifics of the actual system constructed, such that what may work
for one type of system may not be efficient on another system. The
preferred embodiments of the present invention can also be
implemented using HTML (in association with JAVA, PEARL, CGI, etc.
. . ) for access with browsers such as INTERNET EXPLORER from
MICROSOFT.
[0027] FIG. 1 is a block diagram of an apparatus 100 for approving
color samples in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the
present invention. The color approval system 100 provides automated
methods that incorporate much of the expertise of a color matching
professional. It will be appreciated by those of ordinary skill in
the relevant arts that the color approval system 100, as
illustrated in FIG. 1, and the operation thereof as described
hereinafter is intended to be generally representative such systems
and that any particular system may differ significantly from that
shown in FIG. 1, particularly in the details of construction and
operation of such system. As such, the color approval system 100 is
to be regarded as illustrative and exemplary and not limiting as
regards the invention described herein or the claims attached
hereto.
[0028] The color approval system 100 includes a server 102
connected to a computing device 104 associated with the color
office of a retailer. The server 102 can be any number of devices,
such as a personal computer configured to act as a server or a
dedicated server such as those marketed by SUN and COMPAQ.
Preferably, the server 102 is an Internet server capable of acting
as an FTP, http, PPP, and SMTP server. The computing device 104 may
be any device capable of performing the functions described herein,
and could comprise a personal computer, such as those marketed by
DELL, a handheld computer, a PDA, or a dedicated ASIC device. Each
vendor that wishes to submit samples for approval to the retailer
is provided with a computing device 108. FIG. 1 portrays four
vendor computing devices 108a through 108d. However, those of
ordinary skill in the art will recognize that the number of vendors
dictates the number of computing devices 108.
[0029] The retailer's computing device 104 is preferably capable of
receiving data from a remote storage device, such as the server
102. The retailer's computing device 104 and the server 102 are
preferably connected via a network 106 that is accessible by the
vendor's computing devices 108a through 108d. In perhaps the
preferred embodiment, the network 106 is the Internet. However, the
present invention may be practiced on any number of networks, both
private and public. The computing device 104 may also be directly
connected to the server 102 or through a LAN.
[0030] In operation the server 102 provides a central data store
accessible by the retailer and each of the vendors. Vendors upload
electronic color submissions for approval by the retailer. The
retailer downloads the electronic color submissions, reviews each
submission and uploads approvals and rejections for subsequent
retrieval by the vendors. In perhaps the simplest embodiment, the
server simply provides FTP service to the retailer and vendors.
[0031] Spectrophotometers 110a though 110e, such as a DATACOLOR
SPECTRAFLASH or a GRETAG/MACBETH COLOREYE, are preferably connected
to the computing devices 104 and 108n. Spectrophotometers 110n
analyze the color of a samples and outputs reflectance values. Any
device or combination capable of providing standard reflectance
data may be used instead of the spectrophotometer 110a. The
spectrophotometer 110a is used by the retailer to analyze physical
color samples, for example from those vendors that are not
connected to the network 106. Vendors use the spectrophotometers
110b through 110e to prepare electronic color submissions. In
accordance with one preferred embodiment, as described herein
after, the vendor spectrophotometers 110b through 110e are
calibrated with respect to the retailer's spectrophotometer
110a.
[0032] FIG. 2 is a workflow diagram of a color approval system 200
in accordance with the preferred embodiment of the present
invention. A retailer 201 has a retail design team 202 prepare an
electronic request for samples 204 (request(s) 204). The requests
204 are uploaded to a storage location 206 on the server 102. The
storage location 206 may be, for example, a directory available via
FTP, a web folder, or possible a FTP directory mapped as a network
drive using such software as WEBDRIVE. The requests 204 preferably
provide identification information and an indication of the
required color. The indication of the required color can be created
using, for example the ECS described in co-pending U.S. patent
application Ser. No. 09/883,647. Alternatively, a sample of the
desired color can be scanned with the spectrophotometer 110a and
reflectance values provided. Of course, in many instances the
indication can simply comprise a reference to a color standard,
such as PANTONE. Vendors 208 retrieve the requests 204 from the
storage location 206 and prepare samples for submission to the
retailer's color office 214.
[0033] The dye recipe for these samples may be prepared using the
apparatus and methods described in co-pending U.S. patent
application Ser. No. 10/109,122. Hopefully, the vendor 208 will
have an internal review process to determine if the sample is
acceptable. In one preferred embodiment, vendors 208 are provided
with the same software as the retailer 201 thereby permitting a
similar analysis as that which will be performed by the retailer
201. In any event, the vendor 208 prepares an electronic color
submission 210 (submission(s) 210), as described hereinafter, and
uploads the submissions 210 to a storage location 212, for
retrieval by a color office 214 associated with the retailer. The
storage location 212 may be, for example, a directory available via
FTP, a web folder, or possible a FTP directory mapped as a network
drive using such software as WEBDRIVE. The storage location 212 can
be logically and/or physically located on the server 102 or
anywhere convenient. In general, the submission 210 comprises
identifying information such as the vendor's name, an
identification of the request to which the sample is responding, an
identification of the fiber and fabric of the sample, submission
number (first, second . . . ) and date sent. Additionally, the
submission 210 comprises a set of reflectance values as measured by
the spectrometer 110n associated with the vendor 208. Preferably,
the color approval system 200 provides guidance in filing out the
request and may even provide an initial opinion of the color sample
based on reflectance values supplied with the request. In one
preferred embodiment of the present invention, the vendor 208
supplements the submission 210 with a physical sample mailed to the
retailer's color office 214.
[0034] The retailer's color office 214 retrieves the submissions
210 from the storage location 212 for analysis. The color approval
system 200 provides software tools for analyzing the submission 210
including color-matching tools and simulated images of the sample.
Several example of possible software tool will be discussed herein
after. Preferably, the color approval system 200 provides a
calibration function based on data about the spectrometer 110n
associated with the vendor 208. Once the analysis is complete the
retailer's color office 214 prepares a response 216 that, as
described hereinafter may contain either a rejection or an
acceptance. The color office 214 transmits the response 216 to the
vendor 208. Such transmission can take place in a variety of
manners. As shown in FIG. 2, the response 216 can be placed on the
server 102 or may be transmitted directly, such as through e-mail
or fax to the vendor 208. If the response 216 is stored on the
server 102, it may be placed in the storage location 212, as shown,
the storage location 206 or even an entirely separate location.
[0035] The color approval system 200 preferably provides software
for automating the creation of responses 216 including acceptances
and rejections. Acceptances are very straightforward, but
rejections may contain extra data. To further ease the burden on
color-matching professional, the color approval system 200 can be
provided with software that conducts an analysis of the submissions
210 and automatically prepares full or partial responses.
[0036] FIG. 3 is an illustration of a display 300 produced by an
apparatus for responding to electronic color submissions 210 in
accordance with a preferred embodiment of the present invention.
Those of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that the display
300 shown in FIG. 3 is but one of many forms that such a display
could take. In particular, the display 300 is adapted for the many
WINDOWS operating system distributed by MICROSOFT, including:
WINDOWS 98, WINDOWS ME, WINDOWS 2000, and WINDOWS XP. The
particular display shown in FIG. 3 is a sample of one that has been
configured for use by a retailer. Due to the graphical nature of
the WINDOW operating system, screen shots prove suitable reference
for discussing the functions offered by the apparatus of the
present invention.
[0037] The display 300 includes a standard menu bar 302 with pull
down menus, to access a variety of functions provided by the color
approval system, and a button bar 304 to provide one-click access
to certain of those functions. The majority of the display is
broken into several panes of information and user modifiable data
fields. The list 306 displays names of the electronic color
submissions residing in the server 102. The contents of the list
306 can preferably be filtered, using functions accessible from the
menu bar 302 and button bar 304, to show only those electronic
color submission that are current, rejected, approved, or archived.
Functions may be provided to further filter the list based on, for
example the request to which the samples are responding or to show
al the electronic color submissions provided by a certain vendor.
As is known in the art, functions, accessible from the menu bar 302
and button bar 304, may be provided to sort the list 306 by, for
example name or date.
[0038] A sample pane 308 provides an indication of the color of a
sample associated with a selected electronic color submission. The
actual color displayed is determined by the reflectance values
contained in the electronic color submission. Preferably, as shown
in FIG. 3, the sample pane 308 provides a representation of the
desired color, with which to compare the sample color. The
representation may be based, for example on a scan of an approved
sample or calibration data previously stored in the server 102 (see
FIG. 1) To provide further help, as also shown in FIG. 3, the
sample pane also provides displays of the sample and desired color
under different light sources. Any of a number of known algorithms
may be used to create and display the representations of the
desired color and the sample color.
[0039] Looking at the sample pane 308 in FIG. 3, we see a first
representation of the desired color 308a (princess pink in this
case) under a UL3000 light source (Ultralume 3000 a typical light
source utilized in retail stores), a second representation of the
desired color 308b under a D65 light source (a source containing
little energy in the longer wavelengths), and a third
representation of the desired color 308c under a CWF light source
(cool white fluorescent). Representation of the sample color 308d,
308e, and 308e, based on reflectance data contained in the
electronic color submission, are displayed directly below the
representations of the desired colors.
[0040] In a further enhancement of the sample pane 308, the desired
colors 308a-c and sample colors 308d-f may be textured to simulate
the fabric upon which the sample was created. Once again any of a
number of known algorithms may be used to provide such texture.
[0041] Display panes 310 and 312 provide textual and graphic color
correlations information to assist with color approval.
Specifically, display pane 310 provides color reflectance
difference values of the samples while the display pane 312
provides a standard AB plot (also known as a CIE a*-b* plot).
Ellipse 312a shows an acceptable deviance plot. Any point inside of
the ellipse 312a is probably an acceptable match, while points
plotted outside of the ellipse 312a are typically unacceptable. The
size of the ellipse 312a is preferably definable by the user
through functions accessible from the menu bar 302 and/or the
button bar 304.
[0042] The data pane 314 provides identification and other data
associated with the electronic color sample, including an
identification of the vendor, retailer, and pertinent data about
the submission.
[0043] The reply pane 316 assists the retailer with the formation
of a reply to the submission. If the reply is to be an acceptance,
the retailer must only press the APPROVE Button 318 that activates
a function to send a pre-formatted acceptance letter to the e-mail
associated with the submission. Using the MICROSOFT WINDOWS
systems, such integration with an e-mail program such as LOTUS
NOTES or MICROSOFT OUTLOOK is well within the skill of those of
ordinary skill in the art.
[0044] Should the retailer wish to reject the electronic color
submission, checkboxes 320 are provided that list the most used
rejection criteria. Preferably, the list of most used criteria is
user customizable. To include predetermined comments directed
toward these criteria, the retailer need only check the appropriate
box. In addition to the inclusion of the predetermined comments,
the text inserted into the resultant response can also be variable
based on the reflectance values associated with the submission. In
a simple form, the checking of a box, such as "Metameric Match"
would cause the insertion of a fixed text string indicating a
problem with metamerism and a variable text string containing, for
example, the difference values shown in pane 310. Additionally,
there is a check box that allows the inclusion of a suggested dye
recipe, preferably generated with a system in accordance with
co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/109,122, entitled
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR COLOR MANAGEMENT.
[0045] Finally, a text entry field 322 is provided to capture
comments from the retailer that fall outside those provided by the
check boxes 320. Upon completion of the data entry for a rejection
the retailer merely presses the REJECT button 324 to create a
rejection message and either immediately send the rejection message
or, preferably, show the proposed rejection message for approval by
the retailer (see FIG. 5 and the associated discussion
hereinafter). Rather than immediate transmission, the responses may
be queued for further review with all approved responses being sent
out in a batch process.
[0046] FIG. 4 is an illustration of another display 400 produced by
an apparatus for approving color samples in accordance with a
preferred embodiment of the present invention. Those of ordinary
skill in the art will recognize that the display 400 shown in FIG.
4 is but one form among many that such a display could take. In
particular, the display 400 is adapted for the many WINDOWS
operating system distributed by MICROSOFT, including: WINDOWS 98,
WINDOWS ME, WINDOWS 2000, and WINDOWS XP. The particular display
shown in FIG. 4 is a sample of one that has been designed for use
by a vendor. In one preferred embodiment of the present invention,
the software for both the vendor and the retailer are integrated
into a single package. However, those of ordinary skill in the art
will recognize that separate packages can be prepared for the
vendor and the retailer.
[0047] The display 400 is a window that can be accessed from either
the menu bar 302 or a button on the button bar 304 of the display
300 in FIG. 3. In this particular example, the vendor would first
create a new file, using a function activated by either the menu
bar 302 or a button on the button bar 304. The vendor would then
activate a scanning function, that scans the sample being
submitted, using either the menu bar 302 or a button on the button
bar 304. The vendor can then preview and edit the submission form
using the display 400 activated from either the menu bar 302 or a
button on the button bar 304. In the example shown in FIG. 4, the
vendor has selected to edit the "fabric" field in the current data
pane 404. A new value for the field may either be selected from the
list 408 or typed in the text entry field 406. The values in the
list 408 change, as is known to those of ordinary skill in the art,
based upon the field in the current data pane 404 that has been
selected. Once the vendor is satisfied with the submission, he
merely presses the Ok button 402 to send the submission to the
retailer or, more preferably, to place the submission into a queue
for subsequent sending. If a queue is used, the retailer can
request that all submissions in the queue be sent at once by
activating a button on the button bar 304 or selecting an entry
from the menu bar 302.
[0048] FIG. 5 is an illustration of another display 500 produced by
an apparatus for approving color samples in accordance with a
preferred embodiment of the present invention. Those of ordinary
skill in the art will recognize that the display 500 shown in FIG.
5 is but one form among many that such a display could take. In
particular, the display 500 is adapted for the many WINDOWS
operating system distributed by MICROSOFT, including: WINDOWS 98,
WINDOWS ME, WINDOWS 2000, and WINDOWS XP. The particular display
shown in FIG. 5 is a sample of one that has been designed for use
by a retailer to review a response prior to sending. Accordingly,
the display shown in FIG. 5 is activated after the user presses the
APPROVE or REJECT buttons, 318 and 324.
[0049] In the example shown in FIG. 5, the retailer is able to
specify e-mail recipients 504 either manually or by selecting a
recipient from the list 506. The button bar 502 allows the retailer
to "Send" the message or "Cancel" the message. The retailer is also
provided with the option to "print" the message.
[0050] Table 1 shows an example of an acceptance message produced
by a system in accordance with the preferred embodiment of the
present invention.
1TABLE 1 uz,6/27 GERANIUM FLWR0316457S02-B APPROVED Wednesday, May
08, 2002 04:21 PM To: unknown@unknown.com The following color
submission was APPROVED Date: May 08 '02 File name:
GERANIUM_FLWR0316457S02_B_52829.CCC Vendor Name: RETAILER Vendor
Number: 4097569 Mill: JEENFUL Dyehouse: Retailer Name: Brand:
Division: Department: 22 Season: S02 Delivery Number: Color Name:
GERANIUM FLWR0316457S02 Fiber: KNIT JERSEY 100C Fabric: PID: Submit
Number: Labdip Number: B Comments: Date Sent: Apr. 29, 2002 Date
Received: Apr. 3, 2002 Username: nagarwal Email:
alsounknown@unknown.comnagarwal
[0051] Table 2 shows an example of a rejection message produced by
a system in accordance with the preferred embodiment of the present
invention.
2TABLE 2 YELLOW RAY-B REJECTED Wednesday, May 08, 2002 04:20 PM To:
unknown@unknown.com The following color submission was REJECTED
Date: May 08 '02 File name: YELLOW_RAY_0918959_S02_B_48713.CCC
Vendor Name: RETAILER Vendor Number : 4097569 Mill: JEENFUL
Dyehouse: Retailer Name: Brand: Division: Department: 22 Season :
S02 Delivery Number: Color Name: YELLOW RAY Fiber: KNIT JERSEY 100C
Fabric: PID: Submit Number: Labdip Number: B Comments: Date Sent :
Apr. 29, 2002 Date Received : Apr. 3, 2002 Usemame: nagarwal Email:
unknown@unknown.com The submit is OFFSHADE to the standard under
Ultralume 3000. Please adjust the color based on the color values
and comments. This submit shows NO IMPROVEMENT over the previous
submit that was rejected! Color Difference Report UL3000: DE CMC
1.31 (-0.2 Dark, 1.3 Bright, 0.2 Green)D65: DE CMC 1.22 (-0.3 Dark,
1.2 Bright, -0.1 Red)CWF: DE CMC 1.20 (-0.3 Dark, 1.2 Bright, 0.0
Red) SUGGESTED RECIPES FOR YELLOW RAY COTTON RECIPE 0.112%
Drimarene Yellow X8GN 0.199% Drimarene Yellow XRN 0.00435%
Drimarene Blue XBLN 0.12 DE in Daylight D65 0.08 DE in Cool White
NYLON RECIPE 0.0578% Nylosan Yellow E4G 200 0.0152% Nylosan Yellow
E2RL 0.00115 % Nylosan Blue E2GL 200 0.91 DE in Daylight D65 0.46
DE in Cool White POLYESTER RECIPE 0.316% Foron Yellow SEFL 0.00288%
Foron Brilliant Orange ERL 200 0.00217% Foron Turquoise SBLN 200
0.34 DE in Daylight D65 0.09 DE in Cool White nagarwal
[0052] Table 3 shows another example of a rejection message
produced by a system in accordance with the preferred embodiment of
the present invention.
3TABLE 3 Acid Yellow-1 REJECTED Thursday, May 09, 2002 09:19 AM To:
unknown@unknown.com The following color submission was REJECTED
Date: May 09 '02 File name: YELLOW_1_33263.CCC Vendor Name:
RETAILER Vendor Number: 1234 Mill: TEST MILL Dyehouse: TEST
DYEHOUSE Retailer Name: TEST RETAILER Brand: Division: Department:
Season: FALL 2003 Delivery Number: Color Name: Acid Yellow Fiber:
Fabric: PID: Submit Number: Labdip Number: Comments: Date Sent: May
9, 2002 Date Received: Usemame: nagarwal Email:
dontknow@dontcare.com This submit is METAMERIC to the color
standard. The color difference in D65 is too high. Please re-match
using a different dye formulation to correct the metamerism. The
submit is OFFSHADE to the standard under Ultralume 3000. Please
adjust the color based on the color values and comments. The submit
was matched in the WRONG LIGHT. Please inform the mill that the
primary light source is IJltralume 3000 and the secondary light
source for matching is D65. This submit shows NO IMPROVEMENT over
the previous submit that was rejected This submit is FLUORESCENT
making color difference number unreliable. Please make visual
corrections based on the comments. This submit is an EXTREME
MISMATCH to the color standard. Please check to see if the mill has
the right color standard and are matching under the correct lights.
Color Difference Report UL3000 DE CMC 2.89 (1.2 Light. 2.1 Bright,
-1.6 Red)D65: DE CMC 3.13 (1.1 Light, 1.6 Bright, -2.5 Red)CWF: DE
CMC 2.76 (1.2 Light, 2.0 Bright, -1.5 Red) SUGGESTED RECIPES FOR
ACID YELLOW ECS COTTON RECIPE 0.967% Drimarene Yellow CL3G 0.138%
Drimarene Yellow CL2R 0.0125% Drimarene Blue CL2RL 0.26 DE in
Daylight D65 0.1 DE in Cool White NYLON RECIPE 0.45% Nylosan Yellow
N7GL 0.0543% Nylosan Yellow N3RL 0.00964% Nylosan Green NGL 0.33 DE
in Daylight D65 0.12 DE in Cool White POLYESTER RECIPE 0.106% Foron
Brilliant Yellow S6GL 0.0268% Foron Brilliant Orange SFL 0.00306%
Foron Blue SE2RN 0.65 DE in Daylight D65 0.42 DE in Cool White
nagarwal
[0053] In accordance with one preferred embodiment of the present
invention, acceptance and rejection messages also include
representations of the AB chart shown in pane 312 of FIG. 3.
[0054] FIG. 6 is a flowchart of a method for certifying a
spectrophotometer in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the
present invention. The foregoing color approval system is somewhat
predicated on the trust that a retailer places in the
spectrophotometer employed by the vendor to produce the reflectance
values used in the submission. It is within the scope of the
present invention to provide apparatus and methods for approval and
calibration of the vendor's spectrophotometer. Such methods are
preferably integrated with the display 300 shown in FIG. 3. The
functions described herein below with respect to the method may be
activated using the menu bar 302 and/or button bar 304.
[0055] Prior to certifying any spectrophotometer, one
spectrophotometer, typically retailer's spectrophotometer 110a in
FIG. 1, is used to establish the "standard" reflectance data. Such
a spectrophotometer is termed the "master instrument." A set of
calibration tiles is measured on the master instrument to create a
data file with the tile measurements. Preferably, the present
method is implemented with a set of calibration tiles that has at
least twelve different tiles. Such calibration tiles are readily
available from a variety of sources including the British Ceramic
Research Institution (BCRI). The data file may be uploaded to the
web to permit each spectrophotometer 110n access.
[0056] The method starts in step 600. In step 602, the vendor
selects a model of spectrophotometer that is attached to his
computing device. The retailer can suggest or demand that the
vendor only use certain preferred brands and models that have a
history of producing acceptable results. Next in step 604, the
vendor performs the calibration functions associated with his
particular model. Most spectrophotometers calibrate using black and
white tiles. Next in step 606, the vendor measures the drift of his
spectrophotometer, (typically using a green tile). In step 608 a
check is made to determine if the drift is acceptable. If the drift
is not acceptable, the method returns to step 604 for additional
calibration.
[0057] If the drift is acceptable in step 608, the method goes to
step 610 and calibration tiles are measured. These may be the same
calibration tiles used to create the data file with the master
instrument or may be a similar set from the same provider of tiles.
Once the vendor has measured the calibration tiles, a profile is
prepared in step 612. The profile is a collection of correction
factors that can be applied to the output of the spectrophotometer
being certified that transform the output to simulate the output of
the retailer's spectrophotometer. A variety of known algorithms
exist to create the correction factors. In general, the retailer's
measurements are compared with the measurements on the master
instrument to determine color differences between the readings on
the two instruments. A regression model may be developed to better
correlate the two instruments. For example, a linear model with an
offset and a weight may be applied at each wavelength. The
parameters from such a model become the "profile" of the instrument
and may be saved locally or sent to the sever 102 in FIG. 1 for
access by the retailer.
[0058] In the example shown in FIG. 6, the profile is transmitted
to the retailer in step 614 for use when analyzing any submission
from that particular vendor. However, the data may be stored on
locally on the vendor's computer or in the server 102. In this
case, the profile will be used to modify the reflectance data of
future submissions prior to transmitting the electronic color
submission. The method ends in step 616.
[0059] Although a few embodiments of the present invention have
been shown and described, it will be appreciated by those skilled
in the art that changes may be made in these embodiments without
departing from the principles and spirit of the invention, the
scope of which is defined in the claims and their equivalents.
[0060] For example, the color approval system can be modified to
automatically perform some of the analysis and preparation of
acceptance and rejection letters. One simple method is to threshold
the difference values or the AB plot values. Those that display an
extremely close match can automatically receive acceptance letters
while those with extremely far off matches can receive rejections
letters, with a canned "Extreme Mismatch" message. Electronic color
submissions that cannot be classified as approved or rejected can
be queued for manual review using the tools provided by the present
invention. These letters could be queued for review or
automatically sent at the discretion of the retailer.
[0061] Additionally, the system can be adapted for use in
situations where either a vendor or the retailer lacks access to a
suitable network. In such a case, the system could print out an
electronic color submission or response in a predetermined format
for manual processing.
[0062] By way of a further example, the system can be constructed
in a modular way permitting the use of plug-in technology
permitting users to substitute different analysis and reporting
tools for those described herein.
* * * * *