Hello Gunnar, Terry and all,
Colour is not a "thing".I am asking similar questions when I read this thread.I am not a physicist, but I will attempt to answer your question.
To answer your question, first, in simple theoretical terms, we actually see, perceive and discriminate the reflection of light. Visible light seen by humans is a very narrow part of the broad range of energy on the electromagnetic spectrum, and we see a part of it ( infrared and ultraviolet are on this spectrum and we do not "see" it). This energy is in the form of wavelengths and these are captured and recorded for the purposes of understanding how light is composed, for all light sources, and including the sun at different times of the day/location and artificial sources ranging from incandescent, fluorescent, high intensity, and more recent sources such as LEDs....am happy to add detail if interested.
Second, light is emitted from sources and reflects on objects and we see the reflected light in the form of colour in our range of vision. The "colours" we see are in range from violet to red ( colours of the light spectrum, ie. spectral energy). We see and absorb this energy that is reflected and perceive both light and colour - light and colour first, then objects and detail, and all in a matter of 2-3 seconds. The "colours" we see are in the form of variations of pigment or energy reflections and are seen in variations of hue, value and saturation. The light that reaches our eye is influenced by the physical properties of surfaces, objects and the things we see. An apple is "red" until the colour of light changes from pure white light ( white light is composed of all the colours of light spectrum such as the sun and the "primary" colours of white light are red, green and blue) to artificial light such as fluorescent light, which changes the nature of the "red" that we perceive. When we buy red meat in the store, for example, if the light that reflects on the meat is of a good composition of these rays then we will see the meat as "red"; however if the light is of a poor composition of wavelengths, we might see the meat as "brownish red", "reddish brown" or something else that we perceive subjectively and as such we may not want to buy it. (of course it may also actually be brown, but this is a discussion for another time). This is known as "Colour rendering" - the capacity of light to accurately render an object a colour that we as humans perceive and accept as the colour we think it should be.
Many other factors influence how we see and perceive light and colour, and I can add this to the discussion if you are interested.
Finally, we process many types of hues (relative pureness), intensity ( amount of grey added or subtracted) and saturation ( relative amount of white) as well as the diverse range of RGB values in light sources such as Light emitting diodes (LEDs). We perceive about 2,000,000 colours, depending on the sources.
Yes, influences and resources includes Goethe, Albers, and also Faber Birren, Johannes Itten and many others more recently.
Regards
Tiiu PoldmaMontreal
<Snip>
<Terry (or anyone else),
On Feb 20, 2016, at 4:52 AM, Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
When we assume colour is a continuous spectrum, then in making design theory that includes this we are restricted to using design theory structures and theories that can encompass colour use, design and perception as continuous.
In contrast, when we assume colour is used, designed and perceived as discrete units of individual colour incorporating a range of electromagnetic spectrum , or discrete segments of the electromagnetic spectrum (i.e. each a range of colour that we can regard as the same colour), we can use other design theory structures and theories that do not need to address colour being continuous. Note: there is no assumption that it will be the same bands of the electromagnetic spectrum in each case, only that there will be bands representing each colour rather than colour being continuous spectrum.
I have no idea what this means. It seems to be based on the idea that color is a thing (or, perhaps, a bunch of things, each of which is "a color") or that color = some specific reflectance or transmission pattern. Is that right?
Perhaps an actual example of how color might fit into some theory would help me figure out what you’re saying. (I can’t believe that I’m the only one who is completely lost as to what s being asked or asserted.)
Gunnar
<snip>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|