Re: Humans (and cameras and scanners) do not have a color gamut (?)
Re: Humans (and cameras and scanners) do not have a color gamut (?)
- Subject: Re: Humans (and cameras and scanners) do not have a color gamut (?)
- From: Gerhard Fuernkranz via colorsync-users <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2020 13:25:27 +0100
There is a problem. "There is no *color* a camera [I would say sensor] can't
see" implies that cameras see colors. This would imply they see colors, but still
(as we have said) put out signals that aren't colors. (Why not?)
Cameras sense spectra.
To me, to be consistent, you must say that sensors sense ("see") spectra, and
when their signals are converted to a numerical color specification, may have certain
ranges of color they cannot represent, and/or produce certain numerical values that are
not colors (outside the human spectral locus), and/or represent colors that are outside a
specific color space.
The question is, do you tie the term "color" exclusively to the *human* perception of
electromagnetic radiation in a certain wavelength range, or would you also grant a more general definition,
where the vision of other species (e.g. various kinds of animals) can perceive "color", too? (in
their own ways, of course, since their color perceptions are likely all different from ours - some animals
have e.g. tetrachromatic vision). Wikipedia seems to grant rather a broader interpretation of
"color", not strictly limited to the human perception.
If you grant other species to perceive "color" as well (according to their own notion of color
perception), then simply add cameras to the group of other species, and cameras can "see colors",
too (which are e.g. "RGB colors" then, according to the camera's notion of color perception).
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden