Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,693   Posts: 1,482,428   Online: 780
      
Page 30 of 31 FirstFirst ... 202425262728293031 LastLast
Results 291 to 300 of 309
  1. #291

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Q.G. View Post
    I have kept to the matter in hand in each and every single post i have made.
    That's not how I've read quite a few post of yours to me and others. I'm sorry if I've presumed anything about you.

    If I understand this whole argument over color and light, it would seem as if one side would like to say that '600 nm light' = 'yellow light', i.e. yellow is an intrinsic property of that light. It seems like the other side would like to say that we perceive 600 nm light as yellow, i.e. 'yellow' is not an intrinsic property of light, it's wavelength is.

    If you take those two sides to the next step, the first says magenta isn't a real color because you can't make magenta with one single wavelength of light. The other side would say that's not true because color is 'all in our heads'. I think they would agree with the statement that magenta does not correspond to a single wavelength of light, but that doesn't disqualify it from being a color.

  2. #292
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,458
    Quote Originally Posted by Q.G. View Post
    And there's the problem.

    You would think so. But... That's what this is all (the different threads this has surfaced in) about.
    What problem? You're the only one who has a problem with it, as far as I can tell.


    Completely irrelevant it is here too.
    And when pushed despite of that, misleading and incorrect also.
    Irrelevant to what?
    Misleading, incorrect...how? Compared to what?

    Duh...

    So you do not see what's going on.

    You don't see how yellow is not a mix of whatever two colours, but the colour a photon can have. A photon an emulsion shows a response to, despite it not being a tri-colour emulsion.
    Very presumptive, you are.
    I of course do know that combining two frequencies does not result in reality in their annihilation and the production of a third frequency. But color is a sensation. What we perceive as color does not exist. Only EM radiation of various frequencies. In color photography, emulsions are filtered (frequencies removed) to control the frequency range to which the emulsion is sensitive, or to reduce sensitivity to a frequency or frequencies.
    Functionally, though, combining two colors will result in the perception of another color. Color photographs are for looking at. Color materials are manufactured using methods which work. They use those methods, and we get to look at the all the purty colors.

    You don't see that the tri-colour trickery has to be employed to differentiate between the colours, so you can use panchromatic B&W emulsions to create something you can perceive as separate colours.
    Even more presumptive. Why would I talk about tri-color methods, otherwise? Do you think I don't know about multi-layer color materials?

    You don't see that it is all irrelevant, because we were not talking about anything like this. Until someone brought it up to give some 'relevance' to completely irrelevant comments.
    PE said something like "Sorry guys, this is way off topic". I pointed out an inadvertent error; further discussion ensued. You participated and expanded the discussion. So what's your beef?

    Round and round and round and round and...
    The going is remarkably tough on APUG today.
    That's how it usually is when you're involved.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  3. #293

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Gray View Post
    That's not how I've read quite a few post of yours to me and others. I'm sorry if I've presumed anything about you.

    If I understand this whole argument over color and light, it would seem as if one side would like to say that '600 nm light' = 'yellow light', i.e. yellow is an intrinsic property of that light. It seems like the other side would like to say that we perceive 600 nm light as yellow, i.e. 'yellow' is not an intrinsic property of light, it's wavelength is.
    Those could be two sides. But they are not the two sides in this ongoing thingy.

    The other side in this claims that yellow is an additive or subtractive colour, the result of a combination of two other colours.

    The point about real or perceived (though interesting) is irrelevant here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Gray View Post
    If you take those two sides to the next step, the first says magenta isn't a real color because you can't make magenta with one single wavelength of light. The other side would say that's not true because color is 'all in our heads'. I think they would agree with the statement that magenta does not correspond to a single wavelength of light, but that doesn't disqualify it from being a color.
    Indeed.
    But as said, not what this is about.

  4. #294
    JBrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,778
    Ultimately it boils down to wether you are a Goethe person or a Newton person. Sort of like Elvis and the Beatles. You can like both, but you can't like them the same.

  5. #295

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Q.G. View Post
    The other side in this claims that yellow is an additive or subtractive colour, the result of a combination of two other colours.
    And the first side says...?

  6. #296
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,458
    Quote Originally Posted by Q.G. View Post
    Who said that?

    But yes, all sensors also sense themselves.
    OMG, they're self-aware!



    Since when do photons have a wavelength or frequency?
    Well, since the Big Bang, at least.
    Oh, right. From the pedantic, narrow, apparently-unable-to descend-to-the-level-upon-which-the-rest-of-us-can-communicate point of view, no, they don't have those things.

    You could go down that road, and not be done talking for many years.
    You go ahead. We'll catch up later. Much later.

    You could also assume some relation between observation and the observed.
    Heisenberg would be so relieved to know you agree with him.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  7. #297

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    What problem? You're the only one who has a problem with it, as far as I can tell.
    I am perhaps the only one taking issue with it. But the problem belongs to all of those who believe PE's explanation of colour.
    They are being lead into something worse than ignorance: false knowledge.


    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    Irrelevant to what?
    Misleading, incorrect...how? Compared to what?
    You have read the discussion, have you not?

    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    Very presumptive, you are.
    I of course do know that combining two frequencies does not result in reality in their annihilation and the production of a third frequency. But color is a sensation. What we perceive as color does not exist. Only EM radiation of various frequencies. In color photography, emulsions are filtered (frequencies removed) to control the frequency range to which the emulsion is sensitive, or to reduce sensitivity to a frequency or frequencies.
    Functionally, though, combining two colors will result in the perception of another color. Color photographs are for looking at. Color materials are manufactured using methods which work. They use those methods, and we get to look at the all the purty colors.
    Apparently not presumptuous, but acutely observative.


    Get rid of that red herring about perception and reality.
    Whether you call it colour, energy or frequency is irrelevant. Irrelevant, because it doesn't change anything about the error that is trying to explain everything about colour using an additive or subtractive tri-colour model.
    That's what you have missed.


    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    Even more presumptive. Why would I talk about tri-color methods, otherwise? Do you think I don't know about multi-layer color materials?
    Why indeed. Why would anyone?
    That's the entire point. Tell PE.

    But have you noticed that multi-layer colour materials were pressed into service to explain something that has nothing to do with multi-layer colour materials?
    Have you managed to keep the two apart?

    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    PE said something like "Sorry guys, this is way off topic". I pointed out an inadvertent error; further discussion ensued. You participated and expanded the discussion. So what's your beef?

    That's how it usually is when you're involved.
    And that's why you always get involved in this sort of thing.

  8. #298

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Gray View Post
    And the first side says...?
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Gray View Post
    one side would like to say that '600 nm light' = 'yellow light' [...]
    You do forget in a hurry!

  9. #299

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    Heisenberg would be so relieved to know you agree with him.
    Uhm... Hate to break this news to you, but Heisenberg wasn't concerning himself with this.

  10. #300

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Q.G. View Post
    You do forget in a hurry!
    No, I wanted you to write both sides down explicitly.

    Which leads me to my next question here. Is there someone in this discussion who actually thinks that pure 600nm light is not perceived as yellow?



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin