> On Feb 26, 2016, at 9:46 AM, Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> I get the feeling
> that most people seem happy providing colour can be specified fairly precisely in *some* way.
> On Feb 26, 2016, at 11:25 AM, Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Currently, the challenge is how to link these kinds of design theories to the practical outputs of designers. Colour is a start.
It seems to me that the operative description of color (for the purposes of this particular theory) would be based on a useful description of color (for this particular theory.) RGB numbers with 256 steps in each channel, CMYK numbers with 101 steps in each channel, the numbers from various other systems, reflectance curves, output curves, typical perception, perception by people with red/green color blindness, and a bunch of other things could be descriptions of "color" but you’d be better off using the description that is useful (and clearly stating what the description is) rather than looking for some universal theory of color that fits into some universal theory of design results.
Anyone looking for THE definition of design or THE definition of color does not understand language and definitions.
Gunnar
Gunnar Swanson
East Carolina University
graphic design program
http://www.ecu.edu/cs-cfac/soad/graphic/index.cfm
[log in to unmask]
Gunnar Swanson Design Office
1901 East 6th Street
Greenville NC 27858
USA
http://www.gunnarswanson.com
[log in to unmask]
+1 252 258-7006
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|