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: Florian Höch via colorsync-users <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 19:40:11 +0100
Am 13.01.2020 um 18:52 schrieb Henry Davis via colorsync-users:
One can find all sorts of expert ’scholarly’ work about how animals percieve
color. You bring up tetrachromatic, and there are other theories out there
about animal perception.
They are thrown around as ‘facts’ when a few decades ago they would have only
been counted as speculations.
...So what? (excuse the hyperbole, but what you are saying above is
essentially the same as "a century ago, spaceflight was mere wishful
thinking". Also, "few decades" is an understatement. We are looking back
at almost a decade of "modern" color research.)
The support for such ‘factual’ conclusions is usually given to be found in the construction of the ’sensor’/eye.
Not alone. Scientific research about color and perception includes (and
has to!) the processing in the brain (e.g. color opponent processing
theory).
Not a single case can be made by anyone’s fisthand information about the post
processing by the brains of these animals. Who can know what they see or
apprehend?
You can draw pretty useful conclusions (meaning they work well in
real-life, thus supporting the respective theories) from all the
scientific research that has been done. "Color" perception is not just
"nice to have". Trichromats (like humans) have an evolutionary edge over
(say) dichromats, e.g. when it comes to distinguish edible/nutritious
from inedible/less nutritious food like fruits etc. When you look at the
M and L cone responses of any trichromat, you can see that the responses
of the "sensors" (cones) largely overlap. Yet, we seem to perceive the
"end result", green and red, as very different colors (opposites even!).
Since humans communicate with each other about color we can build models and
references and so on. But animals? Yet, experts are quick to supply examples
of how things must appear to non-humans.
I think you may be conflating the actual research with how it is
presented (usually not by the researchers themselves), broken down and
simplified in newspapers/magazines/articles, online and offline, meant
for consumption by the general public.
When we grant that all of these theories are onto something about the ways
animals percieve color we account for their differences by describing them in
terms of ‘gamuts’.
I like the term "dimensions". A Tetrachromat has an additional dimension
of "color".
Surprise: experts determine gamuts based on the sensor alone! They don’t even
seem to be the slightest bit unhappy about it.
...where? And who? Dimensionality alone doesn't really tell us much
about gamuts.
Florian.
_______________________________________________
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