This thread was locked on 2011-07-19 22:33:46
Photographer
Monito -- Alan
Posts: 16524
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
We say pure "blue" light to mean light have a wavelength that excites our retina and visual system giving us the sensation we call "blue".
A blue shirt reflects blue light so that the blue sensels can receive it and thus put high values into the digital file for that location and so that the blue liquid crystals will light up on the monitor.
A blue filter transmits blue light so that the blue sensels [....]
A blue shirt absorbs red and green light so that the red and green sensels receive no light and thus put close to zero values into the digital file for that location and [....]
NothingIsRealButTheGirl will now confuse you all with metamers, which are not pure single wavelengths but combinations. Several different combinations may give the same visual sensation of "blue", say.
Additive colour is photographic colour where red light combined with green light makes yellow light, meaning we have a sensation we call "yellow" and that approximates the same sensation we get when pure yellow wavelengths shine.
Additive colour applies to transmitted light and subtractive colour applies to reflected or filtered light. A red filter combined with a green filter combined with a blue filter will look almost black because almost all of the wavelengths have been subtracted.
Photographer
NothingIsRealButTheGirl
Posts: 35726
Los Angeles, California, US
Monito -- Alan wrote:
NothingIsRealButTheGirl will now confuse you all with metamers, which are not pure single wavelengths but combinations. Several different combinations may give the same visual sensation of "blue", say. Monito hypen hypen Alan will now confuse you into thinking the world is RGB and there is no such thing as 570 nm 'yellow' light.
A blue shirt may not reflect much red or green, but it doesn't reflect much YELLOW either.
Photographer
Monito -- Alan
Posts: 16524
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
hyphen, eh?
[Addendum:] When I said you'd confuse people, I meant you would confuse them with the facts. How they deal with the facts is their problem, isn't it? I'm sorry if I was misinterpreted, I meant no disrespect.
Photographer
NothingIsRealButTheGirl
Posts: 35726
Los Angeles, California, US
If you can spare an hour, this video on multispectral rendering in Mantra has a great discussion on the spectrum and the R G B response our eyes have to it and what makes certain wavelenght or wavelenght combinations look the way they do Implementing Spectral Colors in Mantra http://www.sidefx.com/index.php?option= … Itemid=132
Photographer
8541
Posts: 1195
North Kingstown, Rhode Island, US
Monito -- Allen,
You seriously need to get off the computer. Put the books down. Go for a walk. Breath in some air, maybe grab a drink and some tail and just chill the fuck out dude... Are you guys like miserable up there in Nova Scotia? It sounds it. The frustration coming through is enough to make me need to go stick a fork in my eye... Chill man, chill....
Photographer
AVD AlphaDuctions
Posts: 10747
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
8541 wrote:
Monito -- Allen,
You seriously need to get off the computer. Put the books down. Go for a walk. Breath in some air, maybe grab a drink and some tail and just chill the fuck out dude... Are you guys like miserable up there in Nova Scotia? It sounds it. The frustration coming through is enough to make me need to go stick a fork in my eye... Chill man, chill.... and your post serves exactly what useful purpose? if anyone needs to chill...
Photographer
HJM Photography
Posts: 1485
Malibu, California, US
Here's my ph.d. physics dissertation--ask me anything about light & silicon photosensors.  had to remove the superwide images but you can see them here: http://elliotmcgucken.com
Photographer
NothingIsRealButTheGirl
Posts: 35726
Los Angeles, California, US
HJM Photography wrote:
Here's my ph.d. physics dissertation--ask me anything about light & silicon photosensors. Ok. I'll ask you.
Are blue objects blue because they absorb so much blue?
Photographer
8541
Posts: 1195
North Kingstown, Rhode Island, US
AVD AlphaDuctions wrote:
and your post serves exactly what useful purpose? if anyone needs to chill... Holy shit! The whole damn country is bent! Jesus, you'll get a chance at the cup next year....
Photographer
AVD AlphaDuctions
Posts: 10747
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
HJM Photography wrote:
Here's my ph.d. physics dissertation--ask me anything about light & silicon photosensors. they didnt teach you how to not break a page when you were in grad school?
Photographer
Monito -- Alan
Posts: 16524
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
8541 wrote:
You seriously need to get off the computer. Put the books down. Go for a walk. Breath in some air, maybe grab a drink and some tail and just chill the fuck out dude... Are you guys like miserable up there in Nova Scotia? It sounds it. The frustration coming through is enough to make me need to go stick a fork in my eye... Chill man, chill.... I'm relaxed. You're the troll making it personal because you don't like me. Get back on topic.
Photographer
8541
Posts: 1195
North Kingstown, Rhode Island, US
NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:
This is how we do it RI style That's how we roll, man! You got it!
Photographer
HJM Photography
Posts: 1485
Malibu, California, US
oops how does one control the width of images in img tags?
sorry!
we didn't cover this in my physics research.
Photographer
8541
Posts: 1195
North Kingstown, Rhode Island, US
Monito -- Alan wrote:
I'm relaxed. You're the troll making it personal because you don't like me. Get back on topic. It's not that I don't like you. Youre obviously very intelligent and could probably teach me all sorts of shit, but you're kind of hyperfucking critical of everything and everyone.... I just don't get it?
Photographer
Monito -- Alan
Posts: 16524
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
8541 wrote:
It's not that I don't like you. Youre obviously very intelligent and could probably teach me all sorts of shit, but you're kind of hyperfucking critical of everything and everyone.... I just don't get it? I didn't criticize anyone in this thread. But you sure are, of multiple people.
If you are sincere, you can start by not mangling my name.
Photographer
Paul Brecht
Posts: 12232
Colton, California, US
HJM Photography wrote:
oops how does one control the width of images in img tags?
sorry!
we didn't cover this in my physics research. by not using tags & letting people click the links themselves...
too bad someone had to quote you...
Photographer
Gloria Budiman
Posts: 1683
New York, New York, US
HJM Photography wrote:
oops how does one control the width of images in img tags?
sorry!
we didn't cover this in my physics research. Resample image to lower resolution -- or simply resize
Photographer
Gloria Budiman
Posts: 1683
New York, New York, US
NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:
Ok. I'll ask you.
Are blue objects blue because they absorb so much blue? They reflect so much blue and absorb everything else (within visible color spectrum)
Photographer
8541
Posts: 1195
North Kingstown, Rhode Island, US
Monito -- Alan wrote:
I didn't criticize anyone in this thread. But you sure are, of multiple people. This isn't criticism?
"NothingIsRealButTheGirl will now confuse you all with metamers, which are not pure single wavelengths but combinations. Several different combinations may give the same visual sensation of "blue", say."
Photographer
HJM Photography
Posts: 1485
Malibu, California, US
Gloria Budiman wrote:
Resample image to lower resolution -- or simply resize i took them down.
speaking of light, i have developed a theory that all light is born by photons surfing the fourth dimension x4 which moves at c. it's called "moving dimensions theory."
http://herosjourneyphysics.wordpress.com/
http://herosjourneyphysics.wordpress.co … -mcgucken/
TOPIC: What is Ultimately Possible in Physics? Physics! A Hero’s
Journey with Galileo, Newton, Faraday, Maxwell, Planck, Einstein,
Schrodinger, Bohr, and the Greats towards Moving Dimensions Theory. E pur si muove! by Dr. Elliot McGucken [refresh]
Author Dr. Elliot McGucken wrote on Sep. 16, 2009 @ 14:14 GMT
Essay Abstract
Over the past few decades prominent physicists have noted that physics has diverged away from its heroic journey defined by boldly
describing, fathoming, and characterizing foundational truths of
physical reality via simple, elegant, logically-consistent postulates
and equations humbling themselves before empirical reality. Herein the spirit of physics is again exalted by the heroic words of the Greats—
by Galileo, Newton, Faraday, Maxwell, Planck, Einstein, Bohr, and
Schrodinger—the Founding Fathers upon whose shoulders physics stands.
And from that pinnacle, a novel physical theory is proposed, complete
with a novel physical model celebrating a hitherto unsung universal
invariant and an equation reflecting the foundational physical reality
of a fourth dimension expanding relative to the three spatial
dimensions at the rate of c, or dx4/dt=ic, providing both the
“elementary foundations” for relativity and QM’s “characteristic
trait”—entanglement, and its nonlocal, probabilistic nature. From
MDT’s experimentally-verified equation relativity is derived while
time is unfrozen and free will exalted, while a physical model
accounting for quantum nonlocality is presented. Entropy, Huygens’
Principle; the wave/particle, energy/mass, space/time, and E/B
dualities; and time and all its arrows and asymmetries emerge from a common, foundational physical model. MDT exalts Einstein’s “empirical facts,” “naturalness,” and “logical simplicity.” For the first time in the history of relativity, change is woven into the fabric of space-time, and the timeless, ageless, nonlocal photon of Galileo’s/Einstein’s “empirical world” is explained via a foundational physical model, alongside the fact that c is both constant and the maximum velocity in the universe. The empirical GPS clocks’ time dilation/twins paradox is resolved by proposing a frame of absolute rest—the three spatial dimensions, and a frame of absolute motion—the fourth expanding dimension upon which ageless photons of zero rest mass surf; which underlie and give rise to Einstein’s Principle of Relativity.
Photographer
Gloria Budiman
Posts: 1683
New York, New York, US
8541 wrote:
This isn't criticism?
"NothingIsRealButTheGirl will now confuse you all with metamers, which are not pure single wavelengths but combinations. Several different combinations may give the same visual sensation of "blue", say." Can we get back to topic please?
NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:
Monito hypen hypen Alan will now confuse you into thinking the world is RGB and there is no such thing as 570 nm 'yellow' light.
A blue shirt may not reflect much red or green, but it doesn't reflect much YELLOW either. From sun's perspective, there's no such thing as *only* 570 nm 'yellow' light. Sun radiates electromagnetic wave in wide spectrum such as
![https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4c/Solar_Spectrum.png/220px-Solar_Spectrum.png]()
Credits: Wikipedia
Photographer
Monito -- Alan
Posts: 16524
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
When I said NothingIsRealButTheGirl will confuse you, I meant no disrespect (but worded it awkwardly). All I meant is that he will confuse you with the facts and what you do with the facts is up to you. Sorry.
Photographer
Paul Brecht
Posts: 12232
Colton, California, US
It would be easier to read & discuss without all these big ass images... (edit) Thank You! ...
Photographer
NothingIsRealButTheGirl
Posts: 35726
Los Angeles, California, US
Gloria Budiman wrote:
From sun's perspective, there's no such thing as *only* 570 nm 'yellow' light. Sun radiates electromagnetic wave in wide spectrum such as
Credits: Wikipedia True, but you are basically just reinforcing what I was saying
Photographer
Gloria Budiman
Posts: 1683
New York, New York, US
NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:
True, but you are basically just reinforcing what I was saying Tell me, if you fire electromagnetic radiation with 570nm wavelength on pure-blue shirt in a perfectly dark room, are your eyes going to recognize it as blue?
Photographer
Monito -- Alan
Posts: 16524
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
Gloria Budiman wrote:
Tell me, if you fire electromagnetic radiation with 570nm wavelength on pure-blue shirt, are your eyes going to recognize it as blue? You'll recognize it a black.
Photographer
Gloria Budiman
Posts: 1683
New York, New York, US
Monito -- Alan wrote:
You'll recognize it a black. Exactly
Photographer
NothingIsRealButTheGirl
Posts: 35726
Los Angeles, California, US
Gloria Budiman wrote:
Tell me, if you fire electromagnetic radiation with 570nm wavelength on pure-blue shirt in a perfectly dark room, are your eyes going to recognize it as blue? ![https://www.digitalartform.com/archives/images/pureBlueBall.jpg]()
Allow me to refer you to my blog May 18, 2006 10:36 AM
http://www.digitalartform.com/archives/ … _hues.html
It's about rendering, but the principles apply
Photographer
Paul Brecht
Posts: 12232
Colton, California, US
NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:
If you can spare an hour, this video on multispectral rendering in Mantra has a great discussion on the spectrum and the R G B response our eyes have to it and what makes certain wavelenght or wavelenght combinations look the way they do
Implementing Spectral Colors in Mantra
http://www.sidefx.com/index.php?option= … Itemid=132 Great link, bookmarked for later......
Photographer
Gloria Budiman
Posts: 1683
New York, New York, US
NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:
![https://www.digitalartform.com/archives/images/pureBlueBall.jpg]()
Allow me to refer you to my blog May 18, 2006 10:36 AM
http://www.digitalartform.com/archives/ … _hues.html
It's about rendering, but the principles apply Which still doesn't hold your claim of my argument reinforcing yours. Because unless you're in a perfectly dark room, firing a carefully modulated electromagnetic radiation at one single wavelength, we're talking about light in general.
Photographer
8541
Posts: 1195
North Kingstown, Rhode Island, US
Monito -- Alan wrote:
When I said NothingIsRealButTheGirl will confuse you, I meant no disrespect (but worded it awkwardly). All I meant is that he will confuse you with the facts and what you do with the facts is up to you. Sorry. Ok, I see what you meant. Fair enough. My apologies...
Photographer
Paul Brecht
Posts: 12232
Colton, California, US
NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:
![https://www.digitalartform.com/archives/images/pureBlueBall.jpg]()
Allow me to refer you to my blog May 18, 2006 10:36 AM
http://www.digitalartform.com/archives/ … _hues.html
It's about rendering, but the principles apply ![https://www.digitalartform.com/archives/images/unsatBlueBall.jpg]()
Your lower example about, the not so pure is probably more real life example, but in the source light, why would there automatically be the presence of green? I understand the the ball & whatever reflection of light will also carry the mix of yellow/blue & cast a green tint, but how did you come to the source as having green by having less saturation?
Photographer
NothingIsRealButTheGirl
Posts: 35726
Los Angeles, California, US
Gloria Budiman wrote:
Which still doesn't hold your claim of my argument reinforcing yours. Because unless you're in a perfectly dark room, firing a carefully modulated electromagnetic radiation at one single wavelength, we're talking about light in general. Awesome. My point was that between the spikes at R G and B that we often imagine tell the whole story are plenty of other wavelengths, and that a bunch of R + a bunch of G is only one way to stimulate the sensation of yellow in the brain.
Photographer
NothingIsRealButTheGirl
Posts: 35726
Los Angeles, California, US
Paul Brecht wrote:
Your lower example about, the not so pure is probably more real life example, but in the source light, why would there automatically be the presence of green? I understand the the ball & whatever reflection of light will also carry the mix of yellow/blue & cast a green tint, but how did you come to the source as having green by having less saturation? ![https://www.digitalartform.com/assets/colorMix1.jpg]()
When filters overlap (which can be a fairly decent model for discussing pigments mixing) most yellow-looking pigments or filters have some green in them.
A PURE spike of yellow overlapping a pure spike of blue would be black
----
** Remember in the example above that 35 * 255 = 35 only when the math is done in zero-to-one space — the number 35 is really 35 out of 255 which is really 0.137, and 255 is really 255 out of 255 which is really 1.0 — so 35 * 255 = 35 only because 0.137 * 1.0 = 0.137
Photographer
Gloria Budiman
Posts: 1683
New York, New York, US
NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:
Awesome. My point was that between the spikes at R G and B we often imagine tell the whole story are plenty of other wavelengths, and that a bunch of R + a bunch of G is only one way to stimulate the sensation of yellow in the brain. Yup. You can get that sensation from:
1. Shining a mix of red and green electromagnetic radiation directly to your eyes
2. Reflecting a "white" LED light source against (EDIT: an object that reflects yellow (red + green partial) and absorbs the rest)
3. Staring at the sun, because it's a G-class star, thus the wavelength peaked at "yellow"
Photographer
NothingIsRealButTheGirl
Posts: 35726
Los Angeles, California, US
Paul Brecht wrote:
I understand the the ball & whatever reflection of light will also carry the mix of yellow/blue & cast a green tint, but how did you come to the source as having green by having less saturation? The yellow ball is (in RGB)
100% R, 100% G, 0%B (lets say) - so the yellow has a ton of green in it in RGB
What we need is a blue with some green in it as well, in order to see green in the final --
the common colors survive the mix
Photographer
NothingIsRealButTheGirl
Posts: 35726
Los Angeles, California, US
One last sidebar -
there is a new TV screen that reflects only tight spikes of R G and B.
In a bright room the screen looks black. However if the right RGB TV image is projected on the screen it looks bright and faithful to the TV image.
So ambient light doesn't wash out the projector TV.
|
