Talk:Color/Archive 2

message: ===Featured Candidate===
I just read this article and think that it would be a good candidate for a Featured nomination.  ReallyNiceGuy
===It's December, a good time to reconsider the name of this page===
It has been appropriate for the past several years for this page to be titled 'Color' as most Wikipedia users in the early days of the 'net were from North America.  But Wikipedia is getting enormous respect and recognition world-wide, now, and the Internet is far wider, too.  
So, perhaps 'Colour' would be a better name.  It would be the usual spelling for most English speakers, and hence make the article easier to read.  And that will make it a better article.
If that's too big a change for some (though it is hardly a 'big issue'), then at least we should have both spellings in the title?
quota
- I completly agree, it is very hard to read this page with the spelling 'color' used, can't both be used, at least in the title? the re-direct option is a cop-out and makes the majority who spell it 'colour' seem like the ones in the wrong, or that wiki is just for Americans.
-Even within North America, it's only the U.S. where the spelling is 'color'. In Canadian English it is colour.
*We already have both spellings, the way it's always done in Wikipedia: Colour is a redirect to Color. We don't need to have this debate again. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 19:18, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Refer to Wikipedia policy on Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#National_varieties_of_English. If the policy is wrong, then please contribute to fixing the policy. Notinasnaid 16:32, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Hi Arrenlex. You may be interested in this proposal. PizzaMargherita 06:10, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for that link, PizzaMargherita. I've forwarded my support of the issue there. Arrenlex 06:24, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2004 

message: It has been appropriate for the past several years for this page to be titled 'Color' as most Wikipedia users in the early days of the 'net were from North America.  But Wikipedia is getting enormous respect and recognition world-wide, now, and the Internet is far wider, too.  
So, perhaps 'Colour' would be a better name.  It would be the usual spelling for most English speakers, and hence make the article easier to read.  And that will make it a better article.
If that's too big a change for some (though it is hardly a 'big issue'), then at least we should have both spellings in the title?
quota
- I completly agree, it is very hard to read this page with the spelling 'color' used, can't both be used, at least in the title? the re-direct option is a cop-out and makes the majority who spell it 'colour' seem like the ones in the wrong, or that wiki is just for Americans.
-Even within North America, it's only the U.S. where the spelling is 'color'. In Canadian English it is colour.
*We already have both spellings, the way it's always done in Wikipedia: Colour is a redirect to Color. We don't need to have this debate again. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 19:18, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Refer to Wikipedia policy on Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#National_varieties_of_English. If the policy is wrong, then please contribute to fixing the policy. Notinasnaid 16:32, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Hi Arrenlex. You may be interested in this proposal. PizzaMargherita 06:10, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for that link, PizzaMargherita. I've forwarded my support of the issue there. Arrenlex 06:24, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: It's December, a good time to reconsider the name of this page

message: I removed this part: 
"cyan is a pure spectral color whose wavelength is located just between the
responsitivity peaks of the "green" and "blue" cones.
A cyan color experience can thus also be generated by an equal mixture of those two peak
wavelengths, as long as these don't stimulate the red receptor."
One can easily see by regarding the CIE chromaticity diagram that that no pure spectral color can be reproduced by a combination of other spectral colors.
Hankwang 19:43, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Metameric colors

message: [This begins a seven-section contribution by Jerzy, which ends with a similar note.]
==== Red ====
The text 
: The RGB coordinates of red are 255 0 128. Note that the color most people call "red" on computers is in fact red with a little yellow in it.
was added  to the article Red in the following edit:
:  18:37, 2004 Feb 14 . . 66.32.124.157 
(with no summary)
: (To avoid confusion, note that a "(last)" of article Red shows that the edit 
:: 11:37, 2004 Feb 17  129.169.8.153 (RGB co-ordinates of 'red' are clearly 255,0,0. Not 255,0,128 which is Magenta-like.) 
:consisted of changing ",128" to ",0".)
==== Green ====
The edit 
: 18:44, 2004 Feb 14 . . 66.32.124.157 
with no summary inserted the text
:The RGB coordinates of green are 0 255 128. The color that most people call green on a computer is actually green with a little yellow in it. Many people think of green as a mixture of blue and yellow, but this is because the blue, the yellow, or both already contains green in it.
: (I, Jerzy, reverted that edit with 
::22:40, 2004 Feb 14   Jerzy (rv to Arj (killing confusion abt color theory)) 
and perhaps the note at Talk:Green is addressed to me.  FWIW, i'm not convinced, but also not prepared to convince others that 66.32... is wrong.)
==== Various color-named articles ====
The contributions of the above IP are 10 articles whose names are colors, all around 18:40, 2004 Feb 14.
 
==== This page (Talk:Color)====
As noted above:  
: 01:25, 2004 Feb 18  66.32.118.38 (What are the primary colors??)
==== Talk:Red ====
The edit 
: 01:33, 2004 Feb 18 Talk:Red (RGB coordinates for Red) 
adds the section == RGB coordinates for Red ==; it has three 'graphs and close to 200 words, and describes a straightforward-sounding experiment using PowerPoint.
==== Talk:Green ====
The edit 
: 01:37, 2004 Feb 18  66.32.118.38 (RGB coordinates for Green) 
put this text at the end of the talk page, under a heading == RGB coordinates for Green ==:
: See the message in the talk about red titled "RGB coordinates for Red", the paragraph about replacing red-words with green-words.
==== Various color-named and color-system-named talk pages ====
The contributions of the immediately above IP are 1 edit each of 
: the 3 talk pages pages above, 
: 01:39, 2004 Feb 18 Talk:Primary color (Psychological Primary Colors), and 
: 01:54, 2004 Feb 18 Talk:RGB color space (Explains the RGB coordinates for the psychological primary colors) 
, all around 01:40, 2004 Feb 18 
User:Michael Hardy has responded at Talk:RGB color space, apparently after finding some of the further experiments described there disconfirming of the IP contentions.
: Do you mean Talk:RGB color model ? Kim Bruning 22:51, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Documenting recent color-related anon 66.32... contributions 

message: The contributions of the immediately above IP are 1 edit each of 
: the 3 talk pages pages above, 
: 01:39, 2004 Feb 18 Talk:Primary color (Psychological Primary Colors), and 
: 01:54, 2004 Feb 18 Talk:RGB color space (Explains the RGB coordinates for the psychological primary colors) 
, all around 01:40, 2004 Feb 18 
User:Michael Hardy has responded at Talk:RGB color space, apparently after finding some of the further experiments described there disconfirming of the IP contentions.
: Do you mean Talk:RGB color model ? Kim Bruning 22:51, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Various color-named and color-system-named talk pages 

message: I changed the wavelength ranges in the table on the top to be in agreement with the CIE diagram (meanwhile I discovered that I put some of the wavelength labels in the diagram at wrong positions). I've seen my share of laser beams with well-defined wavelengths and a number of the cited wavelengths were outright wrong. A 514-nm argon laser generates green light, not cyan. I would call 590 nm (low-pressure sodium street lights) really orange and not yellow/orange. The boundary between yellow and orange is around 580-585 nm in my perception. What to call "orange" is probably very subjective, so I didn't touch those wavelengths. Since I don't have a reference table of what people generally call "blue",  I used the CIE diagram to roughly define what I call green, blue, or cyan.
I think that indigo should be removed from the table. The difference between 430 and 450 nm in the CIE diagram is extremely small and it is agreed upon that Newton introduced this color just to get 7 "elementary colors" instead of 6.
Furthermore, I adjusted some of the HTML colors a bit to my feeling and my monitor gamma. I'm not sure what to make of blue and violet. 400 nm looks vastly different from whatever blue/red mixture you can create on a CRT and does not give a "purple" feeling to me. Pure CRT blue (#0000FF, around 465 nm) is probably closest. An other CIE diagram on the web (Google for it) lists 483 nm as "unique blue", which would be best approximated by a green/blue mixture on a CRT.
Hankwang 19:51, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Color wavelengths

message: Based on the discussion of HSV color space, I think it would be beneficial to add a subsection on "Color Wheel" just above the "HSV" subsection.  This subsection could explain in a little more detail the reason for adding the mixtures of red and blue to the pure spectral colors in order to form a continuous wheel.
I think this would be a good separation to make in any case, but I am particularly motivated by my understanding of the history of HSV.  To me, the idea a "color wheel" as a representation of hue, and the wheel's relation to the pure spectral colors might be something known to Newton, but I thought HSV was just a modern invention and formally a non-linear rearrangement of RGB color space.  That's why I think the HSV color wheel should be discussed as a combination of RBG, not as spectral colors plus the purple line.  "Color wheel"s in general are something that could be profitably related to CIE, while the HSV hue wheel is a derivative of this underlying theory that is designed with the parameters of RGB in mind.
Maybe I'm being too much of a stickler for the scope of this article, but I'll see if I can find time to make this change without messing up the structure of the article. -- Chinasaur
:The HSV/RGB issue sounds plausible. My background is that I once took an introductory course about the physics of color vision. I don't know much about (historical) conventions and terminology. If you know about the history of HSV, then edit ahead! (As an aside, can you, in the future, sign your contributions on discussion pages? Just type four tildes in a row) -- Hankwang 19:56, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Color Wheel 

message: I did not revert, and won't have time to make carefully considered edits in the near future, but I wanted to draw the community's attention to the latest edits and explain why I find them disturbing.
My main source of concern is that many of the edits (here and to related articles, see RGB color model, or to cut to the chase just see the  contribution list for Information-ecologist or for his earlier login Ecology2001) are drastically self-promotional.  It almost seems to me that the main goal of the edits is to create as much interlinkage as possible to a fairly small set of external websites that are all fairly obviously owned by the same person.  If you don't see where I'm going with this, please refer to Google bomb.  Along this vein, please note the page on Collective_intelligence_agency, in particular the objectives section.
At the same time, this editor has put a considerable amount of work into edits unrelated to his personal websites, so it's not clear to me whether he is simply overzealous for my taste, or intentionally manipulating the system to generate higher page ranks.  I don't want to jump to any conclusions about the editor's intentions, and I fully hope that he will appear here shortly to answer these concerns.
I don't mind also mentioning that I find most of the discussion of "peace cubes", etc. to be gibberish.  However, this is not a value judgement on the content itself; perhaps it is simply my ignorance which makes some of the latest additions nonsensical to me.  Nevertheless, it may be a value judgement on the way the edits were approached: I believe it would be better not to add information on the subjects of "peace cubes", and related topics to this article until the meaning of these concepts is more clearly laid out elsewhere.  At present, when I find these terms in the color article, and try to understand them by following available links (including to external pages) I am still rather at a loss.  Without intending to offend, I would go so far as to say that the whole thing seems almost like a bad joke.  If the intent is in fact serious, then it should be clear from my experience why the over-hasty addition of all these linkages before the concepts are well defined in their own articles is not desirable.
At any rate, I congratulate Information-Ecologist on discovering Wikipedia and making a whirlwind of successful first edits.  I hope also that he will understand the reasons for my concerns, and that he will be willing to argue his case for these latest edits, since at present I remain skeptical.
--Chinasaur 10:19, Mar 23, 2004 (UTC)
This is starting to make sense now. This guy has been over at en.wikibooks.org too. We were all sort of wondering what to do with his "books"... but now it strongly appears that they are computer-generated via a Novell DataPerfect relational database. In other words, he's a damn tough wiki spammer. His website needs to go into the banned URL list. AlbertCahalan 05:06, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disturbing new edits by [[User:Information-Ecologist]] 

message: In the next couple of days (when I'm feeling bored), I'll add color coordinates in RGB, CMYK and HSV to each of the color articles.
RGB values I know off the top of my head. In cases where I'm uncertain I look at the nice color bar someone has already added to each page. :-)
HSV I get with the help of the GIMP color picker , which calculates the values for me, not that that's so hard to do. There are also formulas on the [[HSV] page you can use to check me.
Many CMYK values are really obvious, and I can do those from the top of my head too. If I'm uncertain, I can always use the formulas at CMYK.
I'm less familiar with other color systems. Maybe at some point the lists can be replaced with tables containing coordinates in all kinds of different color systems.
Note that currently I'm specifying colors using as integers in the range  [0,2^8-1]  This is because computers often express colors with 8 bits per channel (page hasn't been created (yet), so see bits per pixel for now). This is the most common way to express colors on computers, so I'm using that. 
For completeness, there are several other methods to express the same colorspace: namely proportion, percentage, different # of bits per channel etc...
I hope this is helpful!
Kim Bruning 22:48, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Color Coordinates 

message: I've now managed to modify all the color pages to show coordinates in 3 colorspaces: RGB, HSV, CMYK. I noticed some irregularities in the pages while doing that, so please check to see if they're correct. :-)
I got a lot of help from Dysprosia for CMYK, and an amazing amount of help from Chinasaur sorting out the HSV oddness.
Have a nice day! Kim Bruning 14:32, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Eeeew, you should remove those. CYMK and HSV are not well defined. CYMK is device-specific. The CYMK for one printer is different from the CYMK for another printer. With RGB, at least you can rely on sRGB to be well-defined. HSV is just plain nuts. If you want something reasonable other than RGB, choose CIE-XYZ or CIE-L,a*,b* instead. This is in fact how the USA specifies highway sign color paints. AlbertCahalan 01:13, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm working on another approach to this, so that the CMYK and HSV can be supported with qualifications. (Of the coordinates presented, only the hex triplet can really be said to be device independent.  Even RGB is potentially subject to different ranges on different machines.) See my proposed article explaining some of the differences.  The idea is that the various coordinate lists would point into this article (which would be at Wikipedia:Normalized Color Coordinates) rather than into the individual articles.  Comments are welcome at my talk page. CoyneT talk 00:31, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: modified all color pages

message: I think it would be useful to have some explanation as to why the violet area of the spectrum is perceived to be a similar color to that of purple (a mixture of red and blue). The reason being that the red cones in the eye are sensitive to the wavelengths in the violet region as well as the longer wavelengths in the red region of the spectrum. Violet is therefore perceived as a stimulus to both red and blue cones. [anonymous, 25 apr 2004]
:added a paragraph to violet -- Hankwang 12:36, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Violet 

message: I just added this sentence: "Humans cannot perceive phase effects of light except in special cases of interference (e.g. see thin-film optics) where phase effects lead to perceivable amplitude changes."  But actually I'm fairly certain that this is true of all biological color vision systems.  I just can't think of a good way for any biological system to use phase information constructively (except in very special cases), so I would assume none do it.  Thoughts?  --Chinasaur 18:00, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Squid can handle phase but not frequency (wavelength). I can imagine that this might have some use in detecting directional orientation toward the ocean surface. AlbertCahalan 01:09, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Excuse me, that would be polarization. AlbertCahalan 00:19, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phase perception 

message: The truth about the discussion above is at Talk:Complementary color. 66.32.241.40 02:34, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Truth about the above 7-section color discussion 

message: White has sections 'People whose surname is white' and a bizzare 'Other definitions' with game fictional character. Most of red article is taken by Red 'Usage, symbolism, colloquial expressions'. Green and black...let's not even talk about that. I am not even going to look at pink. 
What all those pages need is wikifying with (or into) a disambiguation. I'd personally leave only references to color in physics (spectrum and stuff) on those pages and move all other info to other pages, leaving a disambig on the top. Definetly all cultural/language/biology/etc. references (not to mentions surnames, towns and stuff) should be moved to a diffrent page(s). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:53, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambig on specific color pages NEEDED! 

message: Wow, a whole scientific piece with not a word about these terms as used by artists--!  Who volunteers?  Elf | Talk 00:15, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Tint, hue, shade, value

message: I just reverted this quote out of the 1st paragraph of "Color reproduction"--but it looks like it might be a useful term that someone might want to define?  Elf | Talk 16:05, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''Color constancy'''

message: I have done some careful tidying in this section, and added a couple of things I thought were needed. I have added a "See also" section at the article Color vision, and put this comment in Talk there:
:While the first word of the article provides a link to the article Color, I felt it desirable to mark that link in a "See also" section, because there is substantial information on color vision at that article to assist those wanting an accurate summary in the general context of theory of color. Is there any principled objection to this? It seems to me, as a relative newcomer to this whole color-and-vision domain in Wikipedia, that the domain needs considerable careful work, and disciplined re-organization.
I think much of this article is still in need of fine-tuning for clarity and strict accuracy, but looking through the history and the discussion here I am not sure how this can be achieved. I hope it can be achieved, because people have obviously put in a great deal of fine work already. We'll see. --Noetica 23:57, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing the section "Color vision" 

message: I suggest that we move the color model section to it's own page, it is a separate concept enough and this article is pretty long as it is. --Ctachme 02:32, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - and I think that it and the :color space article should be merged, but whether under the title "color space" or "color model" I don't know. PAR 02:51, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move the Color Model section 

message: in the Physics of Color section.  I dont know how to fix it...   Jaberwocky6669 20:14, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)
(Broken color page.png)
That's a picture of what it looked like to me (Firefox, 1024x768) Cuahl 20:51, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Text running over onto image

message: Is it possible to patent a color? 68.40.169.172 03:10, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably not a single color, as it is easy to demonstrate prior art if existing technology can make the color. (On the other hand, how could parts of genomes ever get patented?) However a novel use or arrangement of colors might be patentable if it is an invention. Also, a color's name could be protected by trademark legislation, and lists of colors perhaps even by copyright. (See Pantone).  Any design made using colors is potentially protected by copyright, and might be registered as a trademark. Even the use of a single color in specific contexts can be trademarked. Trademarks are often better than patents as they do not have a set expiry date. (I am not a lawyer, just speculating) Notinasnaid 12:39, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Color Patents 

message: User:80.44.122.202 is changing the spelling of the word "color" in this talk page. Any opinions?? Georgia guy 23:57, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who is this?? 

message: We appear to have the abbreviations AmE and CwE for American English and Commonwealth English, respectively, being put in the article. Since they are cryptic (by which I mean that their meaning is obscure), they are unhelpful. The fact that there may be some linguists or other researchers using such jargon doesn't mean it belongs in this article. I recommend against them. --Yath 06:11, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, those who aren't familiar with this please note an important Wikipedia rule Wikipedia:Three revert rule. Edit wars should be solved by consensus, not reversion, I think. Notinasnaid 07:44, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

text: ADDENDUM: User:Yath has sorted this out with a footnote; this seems like a very good compromise between making the usage clear, and not overloading the opening paragraph with sidenotes. Nice one! Fourohfour 14:19, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  AmE and CwE abbreviations 

message: Covering Chromatics in Colour is like covering Meteorology in Cloud. That is why we need a separate wikipage. Www.wikinerds.org 19:57, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  eh 

message: Can colour represt a type of fealing eg: blue means coward or black =no hope or red=anger?
Pece Kocovski 23:34, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, although these can often be culturally and language-dependent (for example, German apparently uses "blue" to mean drunk, whereas that is not the case in English). But I don't think they should go in this particular article. Fourohfour 00:08, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Represent 

message: It seems in my estimation that color is not:
:Color or colour [1] is the perception of the frequency (or wavelength) of light, and can be compared to how pitch (or a musical note) is the perception of the frequency or wavelength of sound.
as this would be sight, and likewise hearing in the case of sound.
Sight is the perception of light frequencies whereas color might be better defined as differing frequencies of light as perceived by the eye.  Each color is indeed its own frequency and therefore colors together would be the differing frequencies when compared, not the perception of those frequencies. The perception of the frequencies of light do not give them their color as the absence of perception would not produce the absence of color.  See my similar statements about pitch here.  - 134.250.72.125 04:54, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But a color is not specifically a single frequency. What we perceive as a color is often a mixture of three fixed frequencies, mixed in variable proportions. Perhaps an analogy in sound is a chord, but that is distinguishable from a single note; mixed color is something the human eye cannot distinguish from a single pure frequency. But this seems to be getting into the realms of original research? Notinasnaid 08:44, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Perception 

message: Hi there, I notice that in this article there is more activity about spelling than about the subject itself. You may be interested in this proposal to put an end to the problem. Thanks. PizzaMargherita 21:43, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling proposal 

message: It would be nice if this article had a section on representing color on computers.  Or at least a link to such an article in the links section at the bottom. -lethe talk 01:24, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  color on computers 

message: The tables and images in the Physics of color section needs to wikified according to WP:STYLE.  The two images should be framed (or thumbed) with proper captions, and placed inline instead of inside a table.  The two tables should be of the class 'wikitable' and use wikitext. It is too messy for me to fix. --DavidHOzAu 13:08, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikification