From: rwk@crl.dec.com (Bob Kerns)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
Subject: Re: Color considered harmful
Date: 12 Apr 92 14:31:26 GMT
	<1992Mar31.072051@eklektix.com> <2286@isgtec.isgtec.com>
	<1992Apr9.170001.9092@Princeton.EDU>
Organization: Cambridge Research Lab, Digital Equipment Corp.

In article <1992Apr9.170001.9092@Princeton.EDU> bathurst@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Bruce Bathurst) writes:

   From: bathurst@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Bruce Bathurst)
   Date: 9 Apr 92 17:00:01 GMT

   Again I quickly browsed through the posted articles on color.

I'm not quite sure just at what point in your message you stuck your
tongue firmly in cheek.  But let me point out that the set of
artistically-trained and the set of technically-trained people
is *not* disjoint.

Most scientific work on perception of color (or sound) is informed by,
and a study of, the same principals discovered by artists.  That you
found opinions divergent from what you would expect from artists shouldn't
surprise you; I guarentee you that you would find the same to be true if
you polled artists.  Look at how much art varies in its use of color.

This varience is due to the PURPOSE for which art is using color.
Look closely at any of van Gogh's works, and then at Monet's, and
then at Heronimous Bosch.  All three are examples of artists who
were creating representational art, yet whose use of color was
fantastical and non-realistic.  Yet all three are very different.
(Heronimous Bosch clearly puts paid to the notion that this is a
matter of evolving tastes, too).  Each used color to great effect,
but to *different* effect.

It is important to remember that computer screens are NOT (usually)
works of art.  They are utilitarian works, and as such, they fall
under a slightly different branch of aesthetics.  Do *NOT* go to
the opposite extreme, and have all your screens designed by artists.
Artists will make your screen pretty, without regard to how well
it works.  That's art!  Screens are not art.

The world is not divided into "artists" who make pretty, but useless
things, and "engineers" who make useful, but ugly things.  There are
lots of other categories, such as industrial designers, and there
are lots of people who wear more than one hat.  Screens should be
designed by people who understand both the aesthetics and the practical
function of color and other design elements.

The screen designer may be an artist sometimes, or a utilitarian
engineer sometimes, but when designing the screen, both hats need
to be placed aside, and the hat of computer graphic designer must
be donned.  Since this field has its own set of goals, it's own
set of constraints, and its own media, it also has its own set of
rules and techniques.

These rules and techniques are adopted and adapted from other fields,
such as the arts, psychology, neurology, optics, and engineering, but
they are not the same.

   I don't remember anyone proposing that color be abandoned by scientists or
   engineers visualizing abstract images.  My complaint was that it was used
   without purpose by those writing screens and word-processing programs, and
   pop-up everythings.

In my experience, the worst color schemes are chosen not by
designers or software engineers, but by end-users themselves.
I think there are real psychological phenomona here, relating
to visual stimuli & reward.  People *like* to play with their
colors, and they appear to be likely to choose colors which
are exciting visually, regardless of whether it helps or improves
the actual interface.  They'll choose color combinations that
are cause eye-strain, and never realize that they're the cause
of their own pain.

On the other hand, denying users control over color because they
abuse it is definitely the wrong direction.  Being able to assign
color to windows can help enormously in keeping them distinguished.
I think the best approach is to provide the user with a recommended
palette, and warn him about horrendous choices.

Actually, even horrendous choices have their place.  In the windows I
have logged in as root, I make the background color bright green,
and the foreground bright red.  Horrendous.  But it sure makes me
aware that I'm on dangerous ground, and it sure is an inducement to
not do a lot of stuff as root!

(I recently saw someone else who independently came up with the same
idea; the only difference being he used green on red.  That was more
horror than I could stand for mine!)