Re: Of colorful scepticism
Re: Of colorful scepticism
- Subject: Re: Of colorful scepticism
- From: Igor <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2001 16:22:16 +0200
Henrik Holmegaard wrote:
>
Those who wish to maintain that nobody until this day every truly
>
'knew' whether two colors are the same, would you please stay home,
>
because you'll be a serious threat in a traffic crossing -:).
I never had a serious traffic accident, so I take it you're not refering
to me.
:-)
There's some nuance here you seem to have missed.
1: There's no telling wether you and I see the same colour when we're
looking at the same patch of colour. Nothwitstanding the fact that we
could allways identify it for instance as being the same colour as the
top colour of the trafic lights, wich is red. Meaning: the fact that you
and I both identify a colour as being red, doesn't mean we both see the
same colour. (scientific fact, not filosophy)
2: If we compare two patches of colour, we both would be able to tell
whether or not these colours look the same. Meaning: our vision system
is very well suited for matching colours.
This is not semantics or filosophy. I'm talking facts. A scientist will
never ask if a given colour is red. A scientist will only ask if it
looks the same as an adjecent colour. Again: colour scientists on the
list can correct me if I'm wrong.
Point being: a camera profile will have to deal with problem nr 1, a
scanner profile will have to deal with problem nr. 2. Therefore: a
camera profile should be something fundamentally different from a
scanner profile. Which it is not in current colour management.
So I maintain: since we cannot directly compare a colour in our head
with a colour in a camera, a camera profile is more or less futile.
Igor Asselbergs