1992年，在美国普林斯顿举行的CIE第一分部视觉与色彩会议上，一些视觉比色结果被呈现出来，给人留下了系统重大差异的印象。与此同时，美国社会间色彩委员会成立了一个项目委员会，调查当前色度系统的可能更新。CIE决定对这些问题进行更详细的调查，并要求其中央局组织一次专家会议，以澄清可能存在的错误，并为进一步改进提供指导。会议于2004年8月8日在CIE中央局举行- 1993年6月10日。25名色觉、色彩模型和应用色度学专家接受了中央局的邀请，参加了讨论。阅读了18篇论文，总结了CIE 1931和1964色度系统的发展、我们对这些系统所基于的视觉知识、使用1931和1964色度观察者的局限性，并分析了差异的原因和澄清方法。艾伦·罗伯逊（Alan Robertson）概述了CIE色度学60年的发展历程，并总结了1931年和1964年的标准观察者实验。 罗伊·伯恩斯（Roy Berns）分析了CIE色度学所基于的数学假设，给出了一幅简洁而连贯的基本色度学图。然后，比尔·桑顿（Bill Thornton）处理了他的实验，实验表明，观察到的颜色匹配和计算出的颜色匹配之间存在惊人的差异（在1992年发表在《颜色研究应用》（Color Res.Appl.）上的三部分论文中有详细描述）。Hana Kvrvsi介绍了她和她的合著者在重复桑顿的实验中所做的实验结果，她在实验中发现了类似的差异，并能够为观察结果提供进一步的证据:她的32名观察者中大多数是年轻人，但与桑顿的观察者进行了类似的匹配。 迈克尔·布里尔（Michael Brill）提出了一个覆盖理论，该理论可以包含可加性失效。Lucien Morren从另一个侧面启发了CIE色度系统，展示了如何从实验r、g、b颜色匹配中获得x条（λ）、~y条（λ）、~z条（λ）>颜色匹配函数。彼得·沃拉文、乔尔·波科尼和维维安·史密斯在一系列论文中论述了视觉科学的发现，这些发现至少部分地解释了一些实际视觉颜色匹配与其计算的CIE值之间观察到的差异: CIE TC 1-36致力于开发具有生理意义轴的色度图，人们可以期待在不久的将来有一个替代的2度观察者，其中不仅纠正了V（λ）-曲线的明显错误，而且反映了我们目前对色觉的认识。这一新系统预计不会取代1931年的色度观察仪，但它将用于视觉研究，并在试验基础上检查视觉观察和标准色度之间的差异。观察者之间和内部的变异性被认为是导致一名观察者进行的实际匹配与使用平均标准观察者进行的计算结果之间存在巨大差异的原因之一。 另一个主要因素是，如果使用较大的匹配场（如10度场），且刺激强度不太强，杆侵入会扰乱匹配，就像桑顿的实验一样，但在导致CIE 1964标准观察者的实验中也是如此。在标准观察员的情况下，贾德计算了杆侵入的影响，他采取的步骤在本次研讨会会议记录的附件中重现。Pat Trezona和Hirohiso Yaguchi进一步阐述了在确定颜色匹配函数时棒侵入和麦克斯韦匹配与最大饱和度匹配方法的问题。 罗伯特·亨特（Robert Hunt）和克劳斯·里克特（Klaus Richter）的另一篇论文论述了颜色的感知属性。关于CIE色度系统的性质和可能的扩展，以及格拉斯曼定律的有效性的热烈讨论，导致对CIE第1部分“视觉和颜色”提出了一些要求:·1964年颜色匹配函数的推导需要一些非常具体和微妙的操作和条件，以便格拉斯曼定律保持有效。这些操作和条件包括调整长波长的杆状侵入，以及使用中、短波长的高亮度水平来禁止杆状侵入。 使用1964年的色度观察函数来预测在刺激物的视网膜照度小于1000明视trolands的观察条件下进行的视觉匹配实验的结果可能不合适，应警告CIE 15.2的用户。此外，有时这种视觉观察是不可避免的，应概述一套程序，以考虑适当的杆侵入量最近的数据表明，CIE 80中记录的观察者间方差范围的大小- 1989年，对于100场野外比赛来说可能太小了，对于2度野外比赛来说可能太小了。我们建议审查出版物80，重新制定标准偏差观察值的大小，并发布出版物CIE 80的修订版，以便对观察者差异的范围提供更现实的估计目前，TC 1-36已接近完成基本的2度配色功能。我们建议指派一名报告员，负责获取该委员会的结果和新推荐的VM（λ）函数，以形成一个测试色度观察者，其亮度加权方式与当前1931年的标准色度观察者类似。 本报告将提交现场试验，用于已知当前1931年色度观察仪失败的应用，例如在评估白色和窄光谱光（如LED）方面。CIE部门1按照研讨会参与者的要求，TC 1-36将公布一名候补20名观察员的试验数据，并成立了一个技术委员会来处理棒侵入对同色异谱颜色匹配的影响。会议记录共122页。

At the meeting of CIE Division 1, Vision and Colour, at Princeton, USA, in 1992, some visual colorimetric results were presented that gave the impression of major discrepancies of the system. At the same time the US Intersociety Colour Council formed a Project Committee to investigate possible updates of the present system of colorimetry.The CIE decided to investigate the questions in more details and charged its Central Bureau to organize an expert meeting to clarify possible errors and give guidance for further improvements.The meeting took place at the Central Bureau of the CIE between 8 - 10 June 1993. 25 experts in colour vision, colour models and applied colorimetry accepted the invitation of the Central Bureau and took part in the discussions. 18 papers were read, summarizing the development of the CIE 1931 and 1964 colorimetric systems, our vision knowledge on which these systems are based, limitations in using the 1931 and 1964 Colorimetric Observers, and analyzing causes of discrepancies and ways of clarification.Alan Robertson gave an overview of 60 years of CIE colorimetry, and summarized the experiments that led to the 1931 and 1964 Standard Observers.Roy Berns analyzed the mathematical assumptions on which CIE colorimetry is based, presenting a concise and coherent picture of basic colorimetry. Then Bill Thornton dealt with his experiments showing alarming discrepancies between observed and calculated colour matches (described in detail in his 3-part paper in Color Res. Appl. in 1992). Hana Kvrvsi presented results of experiments she and her coauthors performed in repeating Thornton's experiments, where she found similar discrepancies and was able to give one further evidence to observations: most of her 32 observers were young people but made similar matches as Thornton's observers.Michael Brill theorized on a covering theory that could incorporate additivity failures. Lucien Morren enlightened the CIE colorimetric system from another side, showing how one can get the x bar ( lambda ), ~ y bar ( lambda ), ~ z bar ( lambda )> colour matching functions from the experimental r, g, b colour matches.In a series of papers Peter Walraven, Joel Pokorny and Vivianne Smith dealt with the findings of visual science that can - at least partly - explain the discrepancies observed between some actual visual colour matches and their calculated CIE values: CIE TC 1-36 is active in developing a chromaticity diagram with physiologically significant axes and one can expect in the not too distant future an alternate 2 deg Observer, where not only the obvious errors of the V(lambda)- curve are corrected, but which reflects our present day knowledge of colour vision. This new system is not expected to supersede the 1931 Colorimetric Observer, but it will be available for vision research and the checking of discrepancies between visual observations and standard colorimetry on a trial basis. Inter- and intra-observer variability was pointed out as one of the causes leading to large differences between actual matches performed by one observer and the calculated results using the average Standard Observer.Another major factor is rod-intrusion that upsets the match if large matching fields are used (as e.g. a 10 deg field) and the stimuli are not too intense, as was the case in Thornton's experiments, but also in the experiments leading to the CIE 1964 Standard Observer. In case of the Standard Observer elaboration Judd calculated the effect of the rod-intrusion, and the steps taken by him are reproduced in the Annex of the Proceedings of this Symposium.Pat Trezona and Hirohiso Yaguchi expanded further on issues of rod-intrusion and Maxwell match versus maximum saturation match method in determining colour matching functions.A further block of papers by Robert Hunt and Klaus Richter dealt with perceptual attributes of colour.Lively discussions on the properties and possible extensions of the CIE Colorimetric System and on the validity of Grassmann's laws led up to the formulation of some requests to CIE Division 1 "Vision and Colour":• The derivation of the 1964 colour matching functions required some very specific and subtle operations and conditions so that Grassman's laws would remain valid. These operations and conditions include an adjustment for rod intrusion at long wavelengths and the use of high luminance levels at middle and short wavelengths to prohibit rod intrusion. The use of the 1964 colorimetric observer functions to predict the results of visual matching experiments conducted under observing conditions in which the retinal illuminance of the stimulus is less than 1000 photopic trolands may not be appropriate and users of CIE 15.2 should be so warned. In addition, there are times when such visual observations are unavoidable and a set of procedures should be outlined for taking into account the appropriate amount of rod intrusion.• Recent data has indicated that the magnitude of the range of inter-observer variance documented in CIE 80-1989, may be too small for 100 field matches and very much too small for 2 deg field matches. We recommend that Publication 80 be reviewed and the magnitude of the Standard Deviate Observer values be reformulated and a revision of Publication CIE 80 be issued to provide a more realistic estimate of the range of observer differences.• Currently, TC 1-36 is close to completing its work on fundamental 2 deg color matching functions. We should like to recommend that a reporter be assigned the task of taking the results of this committee and the newly recommended VM(lambda) function to form a test colorimetric observer with luminance weighting in similar manner to the current 1931 standard colorimetric observer. This report would be submitted for field trial for applications where the current 1931 colorimetric observer has been known to fail, such as in the evaluation of whites and narrow spectral lights such as LEDs.CIE Division 1 followed the requests from the symposium participants, TC 1-36 will publish data for an alternate 20 Observer for trial, a Technical Committee was set up to deal with the effects rod intrusion has in metameric colour matches.The Proceedings contain 122 pages.